Full text of "The expositor's Greek Testament"

See other formats

€SS9269 


3D3T109 S.TSVHOIW “LS 4O ALISHSAINN 





— te 


τὰς by TS Gad 


ed 
Se 














5 yphcuk aE 


THE EXPOSITOR’S 
ΕΚ TESTAMENT 


EDITED BY THE REV. 


W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D. 


EDITOR OF “THE EXPOSITOR,” “THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE,” ETC. 


VOLUME IIL. 


NEW YORK 
GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY 


a aad” a ae a ΨΨΟΝ 


a 
} 
t 


A, 

ae δι 

ΠΟΥ͂Ν 

v ; : wate 
~ . 


te 











Poe EXPOSITOR'S 
SREEK TESTAMENT 


I 


THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE 
CORINTHIANS 


BY THE VERY REV. 


J. H. BERNARD, D.D. 


DEAN OF ST. PATRICK’S, DUBLIN 


II 
THE EPISTLE TO THE .GALATIANS 


BY THE REV. 


FREDERIC RENDALL, M.A. 


III 
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS 


BY THE REV. 


5. Ὁ. F. SALMOND, D.D. 
IV 
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS 


BY THE REV. 


H. A. A. KENNEDY, D.Sc. 


V 
THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS 


BY PROFESSOR 


A. S. PEAKE, M.A. 


NEW YORK 
GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY 











, : PR 
; One 


RA is 
‘ a ats ie , 


5 
= 
oy 
δ 
Ε 
x 
5 
Ω 
Ζ 
9 
a 
Ξ 


TO THE 


CORINTHIANS 














INTRODUCTION. 


CHAPTER I. 
THE TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING. 


1. In the case of no book of the New Testament is it more 
essential to a true understanding of its language, that we should 
have a clear view of the circumstances under which it was composed, 
than in the case of 2 Corinthians. It is the most autokiographical 
of all St. Paul’s letters, and it abounds in personal allusions, which 
it is difficult, at this distance of time, to appreciate, and of which 
some will probably always remain obscure. It glows with the heat 
of fervid life,! and was evidently written under the influence of 
strong emotion. And, if we do not assign it to its true place in St. 
Paul’s life, we are likely to miss a good deal of the force of its 
earnest and eager words. It is, therefore, desirable to enter into 
more detail as to the occasion of its composition than was necessary 
in the case of a treatise like the Epistle to the Romans, the argu- 
ments of which are largely independent of the circumstances of the 
author at the time when it was written. 

2. In the nineteenth chapter of the Acts we find that Ephesus 
has become St. Paul’s headquarters; the centre of interest has 
been shifted from Jerusalem and Antioch, and the Apostle’s labours 
are being mainly spent upon Asia Minor. Corinth, however, 
occupies a considerable share in his thoughts; and, during the 
period of over two years which he spends at Ephesus, communica- 
tions with the Corinthian Church are being carried on. It is the 
sequence of events during this period and the subsequent six months 
that we have to examine. Such an examination of the order in 
which events followed one another might be made without any 
determination of the absolute dates of any ; but it is convenient to 


‘See Hort, ¥udaistic Christianity, p. 98. 


4 INTRODUCTION 


indicate here the system of chronology which has been adopted. 
Provisionally, the dates assigned to the principal events of St. Paul’s 
life by Mr. Turner! will be taken as a basis for investigation. It is 
now pretty generally agreed among scholars that the dates formerly 
accepted, e.g., by Wieseler and Lightfoot, are two years too late; 
but this does not, of course, affect materially the accuracy of Light- 
foot’s conclusions as to the order in which the several incidents of 
the Apostle’s career took place. Indeed, the scheme of recon- 
struction of St. Paul’s history while at Ephesus, which has approved 
itself to the present editor, is in the main that put forward by 
Lightfoot,? although his dates have not been followed. This scheme 
is not without difficulties ; but it is dependent on fewer subsidiary 
hypotheses than any other which has been proposed, and it possesses 
special claim to consideration from the fact that it is an attempt to 
explain the documents as they stand without resort to the heroic 
measures of dissection which some critics have found it necessary to 
adopt. , 

3. I start, then, with the assumption that St. Paul’s sojourn of 
over two years at Ephesus’ (Acts xix. 10) lasted from December, 52, 
or January, 53, to March or April, 55, and I proceed to examine his 
communications with Corinth during that period. The Church at 
Corinth had been founded by the Apostle on his second missionary 
journey, late in the year 50 (Acts xviii. 1 f.) ;* but, all too soon after 
its foundation, it became apparent that the laxity of morals, for 
which Corinth was notorious, was showing itself in the lives of the 
Christian converts. Men do not easily shake themselves free from 
evil traditions and associations ; and the power of the new faith took 
time to establish itself there as elsewhere. When the restraints 
imposed by the Apostle’s presence were removed, various scandals 
betrayed the moral weakness of these clever Greeks who had 
welcomed the new teaching but a short time before. It would 
appear that while St. Paul was at Ephesus bad news reached him 
from Corinth as to the morals of his converts; and in consequence 
of this he paid to that city a brief disciplinary visit, of which indeed 
no account has been given by St. Luke, but which is alluded to in St. 
Paul’s Epistles (see especially 2 Cor. xii. 21, where we are informed 


* See article ‘‘ Chronology of N.T.” in Hastings’ Bible Dictionary. 

2 See Biblical Essays, pp. 222, 274. 

310 is probable that the ‘three months ” of ver. 8 is to be reckoned in addition 
to the “‘two years”’ of ver. 10; cf. τριετίαν, Acts xx. 31. 

*On the Church at Corinth, see the first chapter of Prof. Findlay’s Introduction 
οἱ Corinthians (vol. ii., p. 729 ἢ). 














INTRODUCTION 5 


that it was in consequence of the lax morality of the Corinthians 
that he visited them in grief). 

4, The reasons for holding that this visit (which we shall call the 
“Intermediate Visit’’) took place are as follows. We have seen 
that St. Paul’s first visit to Corinth is recorded in Acts xviii. 
Another visit is mentioned in Acts xx. 3, viz., that which was sub- 
sequent to the two Canonical Epistles to the Corinthians, and which 
was in contemplation while he was writing both. Its date was 
55-56. But it appears from 2 Cor. xii. 14, xiii. 1, that this was his 
third visit; and hence a visit to Corinth must have been paid 
between the years 50 and 55 (probably towards the end of the 
period, say in the autumn of 54), of which no account is given in the 
Acts.2 It is all but impossible to fit in this visit if we do not 
suppose it to have been paid from Ephesus; and it would have been 
an easy matter for St. Paul to have undertaken this. Ephesus was 
only a week or ten days’ sail from Corinth, and on the receipt of ill 
news it would have been the most natural thing in the world that 
he should thus cross the A?gean hastily to set matters right. It 
appears distinctly from 2 Cor. ii, 1 that this visit was a painful one, 
and such as he would not wish again to have experience of. And, 
further, the language of xii. 21, xiii. 2, suggests that the trouble which 
caused this Painful Visit was not faction or schism, but unchastity 
of life among his converts. 

5. St. Paul thereafter returned to Ephesus and wrote, probably 
after no long interval, a letter which is now lost. It is mentioned 
in 1 Cor. v. 9; and it contained, he tells us, injunctions to the 
Corinthian Christians “to keep no company with fornicators,” in- 
junctions (probably) suggested to him by what he had seen on his 
recent visit. That visit had been one of stern rebuke rather than 
of counsel ; and it is quite intelligible that on his return he should 
desire to put in writing his deliberate advice. There is no indication 
that anything had happened up to this point which suggested the 
rise of schisms or of party spirit at Corinth. Indeed it may well 
have been that his visit, ἐν λύπῃ (2 Cor. ii. 1), was the proximate cause 
of the schisms with which the Church at Corinth was soon to be 
troubled ; for the attempt to enforce discipline for lapses in morality 


1 This, indeed, has been denied by Paley (Hore Paulina, chap. iv., § xi.) and, 
recently, by Prof. Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveller, p. 275) and Dr. Robertson 
(Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 494) ; but I cannot think that their explanations 
of 2 Cor. xii. 14, xiii. 1, as alluding to a visit intended, but not paid, are satisfactory. 

2 The language of 1 Cor. xvi. 7, οὐ θέλω yap ὑμᾶς ἄρτι ἐν παρόδῳ ἰδεῖν, seems 
to suggest that his last visit to Corinth had been a brief and hasty one. 


6 INTRODUCTION 


would naturally stir up party opposition, and would stimulate dis- 
affection on the part of the less stable members of the little 
community. The Lost Letter, then, consisted mainly of rules as 
to conduct, and was not concerned, so far as we know, with the 
question of schism, which had probably not yet arisen.! Two other 
topics, however, it may have touched upon, viz., the Apostle’s plans 
of travel and the collection for the poor Judzan Christians. We 
must not lose sight of the fact that St. Paul’s plans were in the 
main determined during these years by his purpose of making a 
collection to relieve the needs of the poorer converts in Judza and 
of bringing it in person to Jerusalem. Now, as to his plans of 
travel, it is plain that the route mentioned in 1 Cor. xvi. 5, and 
actually adopted in the sequel (Acts xix. 21), was not the route 
which the Corinthians expected him to take. At one time he had 
wished to travel from Ephesus to Corinth—Macedonia—Corinth— 
Jerusalem, a route which would twice give them the benefit and 
the privilege of seeing him while he was in Europe (2 Cor. i. 15, 
16). This plan seems to have been communicated to them before 
1 Corinthians was written ; and it is obvious to suggest that it was 
announced in the Lost Letter. Again, it will appear (see § 7) from 
a consideration of the structure of the First Canonical Epistle to the 
Corinthians that the Corinthians in their letter which preceded it 
had asked for details about the manner in which the collection 
for the Judzan Christians was to be made. In other words, they 
had already been informed by St. Paul that such a collection was 
being erganised ; and so we are led round to the suggestion that 
this information also was contained in the Lost Letter. 

6. We now proceed with the history. Some time after the Lost 
Letter had been despatched bad news again came from Corinth, and 
this of two kinds. First, members of Chloe’s household (ot Χλόης, 
1 Cor. i. 11, cf. also 1 Cor. xi. 18) reported that factions had arisen, 
and that a Peter party and an Apollos party were setting themselves 
up in opposition to the party of Paul. Some indeed went so far as 
to call themselves, par excellence, the ‘‘ Christ party ” (1 Cor. i. 12). 
And, secondly, a rumour reached Ephesus that an abominable case 
of incest had occurred among the Christians at Corinth (1 Cor. v. 1). 
This was much worse than any of the moral lapses which the Apostle 
had previously rebuked in person or by letter; it was a wickedness 


1 This is an argument which should not be overlooked for placing the Inter- 
mediate Visit before the Lost Letter, or at any rate before the First Canonical 
Epistle. 








INTRODUCTION 7 


which even the heathen did not tolerate. About the same time 
that these distressing reports reached Ephesus, a dutiful message 
to St. Paul was brought from Corinth by Stephanas, Fortunatus 
and Achaicus (1 Cor. xvi. 17). These envoys seem to have 
brought with them a letter asking for advice on certain points of 
conduct and discipline, viz., about Marriage, Celibacy, the use of 
Idol-meats, the Gifts of the Spirit, and the Collection,? with each 
of which the Apostle deals separately in his reply under a distinct 
heading, beginnning περὶ δέ... It is interesting, because so 
natural,? that the Corinthians seem to have made no mention in 
their letter of the schisms and disorders which had arisen among 
them.‘ 

7. It was in consequence of the reports which had reached him, 
as well as in reply to this letter of the Corinthian Church, that St. 
Paul wrote the First Canonical Epistle. Of this the early part is 
entirely taken up with warnings against schism (chaps. i.-iv.), and with 
a stern rebuke for the sins of the flesh into which they had fallen, 
and of which the Church had not taken cognisance (chaps. v., vi.). 
The remainder of the Epistle is mainly occupied with the letter of 
the Corinthians to him, taking up their points in order: περὶ δὲ ὧν 
ἐγράψατε, καλὸν ἀνθρώπῳ γυναικὸς μὴ ἅπτεσθαι (1 Cor. vii. 1); περὶ δὲ 
τῶν παρθένων (1 Cor. vii. 25); περὶ δὲ τῶν εἰδωλοθύτων (1 Cor. viii. 1); 
περὶ δὲ τῶν πνευματικῶν (1 Cor. xii. 1); περὶ δὲ τῆς λογίας (1 Cor. xvi. 
1), It thus appears, and it is important to bear it in mind, that 
chaps, vii.-xvi. of 1 Corinthians are of the nature of an appendix or 
excursus, and that chaps. i.-vi. constitute the letter proper, as con- 
taining the Apostle’s special message to the Corinthian Church at this 
juncture. His language in reference to the party spirit which was 
manifesting itself is grave and uncompromising (1 Cor. iii. 12-15), 
and he writes about his own position in a spirit of depression (1 Cor. 


1See Cicero, pro Cluentio, 6, 15. 

2Lewin (St. Paul, vol. i., p. 386) and Findlay (Expositor, June, 1900) have tried 
to reconstruct this letter ; but beyond the general fact that it dealt with certain topics 
we have no data upon which to go. 

3566 Paley, Hore Pauline, chap. iii., 8 i. 

4 Mention may be made here of an apocryphal letter of the Corinthians to St. 
Paul and his supposed reply, which are extant in Armenian and in Latin. An 
English translation by Lord Byron will be found in Stanley’s Corinthians, vol. ii., 
p. 305. These letters do not correspond in any way to the lost correspondence 
discussed above (1 Cor. v. 9, xvi. 17), and, although they were admitted into the 
Armenian and Syrian canon, have no claim to authenticity or genuineness. They 
were originally incorporated in the apocryphal Acts of Paul (see Sanday, Encycl. 
Biblica, vol. i., p. 907). 


8 INTRODUCTION 


iv. 11-13); but when he begins to speak of the bad living of his 
converts, and to comment on the shocking news which had reached 
him, his tone is one of severe and unsparing rebuke. He is astounded 
that such a scandal as has been mentioned to him (1 Cor. v. 1) 
should be endured for a moment, and he bids them excommunicate 
the offender at once (1 Cor. v.5). Inthe Lost Letter he had warned 
them against associating with persons who lived impure lives, but 
now it has actually become necessary to rebuke them for tolerating 
the company of a man who is living unchastely with his stepmother 
(1 Cor. v. 1). They must ‘‘put away the wicked person” from 
among themselves (1 Cor. v. 13). It is their duty to “judge them 
that are within,” and it is a scandalous thing that such wrongs as 
a Christian father endures when his son has robbed him of his wife 
should be brought for adjudication before heathen tribunals.1 The 
Christian community should exercise its own spiritual prerogative 
(1 Cor. v. 4), and decide such cases without the interference of 
heathen lawyers (1 Cor. vi. 1-7). The wickedness of sins of the flesh 
only appears in its true light when judged on Christian principles 
(1 Cor. vi. 15 ff.), and it is by these that the fitting punishment should 
be determined. 

8. Such is the language and the drift of the body of 1 Corin- 
thians. The allusions to the Passover feast (1 Cor. v. 7, 8, cf. xv. 
20, 23) make it probable that it was written about Easter, and the 
year was, according to the system we have adopted, 55 a.p. This 
is a consequence of 1 Cor. xvi. 8, from which it appears that when 
it was composed it was St. Paul’s intention to leave Ephesus after 
the ensuing Pentecost. Thus the letter was written during the 
last months of his stay at that city.2 Nothing is said as to the 
bearers of the letter; but 2 Cor. xii. 18 seems to indicate that Titus 


1The Roman law under which a prosecution for adultery would be made 
was the lex Fulia de adulteriis, passed by Augustus, 17 B.c. It is probable, how- 
ever, that native Greek law would be enforced at Corinth. This also recognised 
adultery as an indictable offence; the damages allowed in any special case being 
assessed at the discretion of the judges. 

*The subscription in the received text states that it was written at Philippi; 
but this is a-manifest mistake, probably due to a misunderstanding of the words 
Μακεδονίαν yap διέρχομαι ἱπ x Cor. xvi. 5. Ver. 8 of the same chapter is conclusive 
as to the place of writing. This subscription further adds that the letter was 
carried to Corinth by the envoys Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus along with 
Timothy; but this again seems to be a misapprehension, although there is some 
justification in x Cor. xvi, 18 for the supposition that the envoys who had brought 
the Corinthian letter to Ephesus took back the answer (see above). For Timothy’s 
movements see § 13 note. 





OO ψμυ οιἰἰπππ σ σοι 


»Ψ. 


mime 





INTRODUCTION 9 


and an unnamed brother (see note in loc.) were entrusted with it. 
This is confirmed by 2 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 6, passages which explain 
how St. Paul’s grave anxiety as to the reception which the Corin- 
thians would give to his letter of warning and rebuke was allayed 
by the news which Titus brought him about it (see notes zn /oc.).} 

9. I have already remarked that the directions about the collec- 
tion to be made at Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 1) were given in answer to 
enquiries on the subject sent by the Corinthian Christians, and 
presuppose that his correspondents were already sensible of the 
obligation which rested upon them of helping the poor brethren of 
Judza. It is only the manner in which the collection is to be 
made that is now prescribed for the first time (Easter, 55). And 
we have also seen (§ 5) that the information as to St. Paul’s plans 
of travel given in 1 Cor. xvi. 5 was such as to cause the Corin- 
thians keen disappointment.2 He then announces that he will 
come vid Macedonia, and that he may possibly winter at Corinth 
(1 Cor. xvi. 6). This plan was carried into effect. He left Ephesus 
about April, 55, shortly after the riot which was stirred up by 
Demetrius, and proceeded to Macedonia (Acts xx. 1) υἱᾶ Troas 
(2 Cor. ii. 12). Here he had arranged to meet Titus on the return 
of the latter from his mission to Corinth; but he was disappointed. 
We do not know how long he waited for Titus; but after an interval 
during which “a door was opened unto him” (2 Cor. ii. 12) he 
crossed over to Macedonia in much anxiety of spirit. At last they 
met at some undefined point in St. Paul’s Macedonian tour of in- 
spection (Acts xx. 2), not improbably at Philippi, as Neapolis the 
port of Philippi was the natural place of embarkation for Troas. 
Thus St. Paul would be likely to meet Titus at Philippi on his way 
to their rendezvous. Further, Philippi was a place where St. Paul 


1See, on this question, Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, p.280f. Titus is mentioned 
nine times in 2 Corinthians, and evidently had a special interest in and connexion 
with Corinth. That his name does not appear in 1 Corinthians is no more sur- 
prising than that it does not appear in Acts. It is likely that it was the ability 
with which he conducted himself as the bearer of 1 Corinthians, and as St. Paul’s 
representative at that critical moment at Corinth, that first marked him out as fit 
to be a leader in the Church. 

2Dr. Robertson says (Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 493) that 1 Cor. xvi. 
5, 6 is “4 passage totally out of correspondence with the situation presupposed 
in 2 Cor. i. 23. Moreover, in defending his change of plan (2 Cor. i. 15-23) St. 
Paul would not have failed to appeal to the clear statement of his intentions in 
1 Cor. xvi. 5.” I cannot understand where the difficulty comes in. The Corin- 
thians took umbrage at the message of 1 Cor. xvi. 5; appealing to it would have 
had no point. St. Paul’s line of defence is quite sound (see § 12 below). 


ΙΟ INTRODUCTION 


had many good and staunch friends; and it was a suitable centre 
from which to visit the Christian communities formerly founded by 
him.} 

10. Titus reported in the first instance that the Corinthians had 
loyally responded to the appeal made by St. Paul in 1 Cor. v. and vi. 
as to their treatment of the case of incest. They had taken the 
case into their own hands, and had punished the offender with 
extreme severity (2 Cor. ii. 6 ff.). They had gone so far in their 
zeal to assert the spiritual prerogative of the Church, in which St. 
Paul deemed himseif to have an important share (2 Cor. vii. 12; 
cf. 1 Cor. v. 4, συναχθέντων ὑμῶν καὶ τοῦ ἐμοῦ πνεύματος), that it was 
now desirable to offer counsels of forbearance (2 Cor. ii. 6 f.). 
rather than to inflame their indignation against the offender. The 
really important end which the Apostle had in view when writing 
1 Cor. v. had been gained, vzz., he had convinced the members of 
the Church that it was their duty to take cognisance of grave moral 
offences. Quite possibly the civil courts might have decided equit- 
ably as to the measure of the penalty to be inflicted for the ἀδικία ; 
but the primary purpose of his sharp rebuke was not to secure due 
retribution in this particular instance (ody εἵνεκεν τοῦ ἀδικήσαντος οὐδὲ 
εἵνεκεν τοῦ ἀδικηθέντος, 2 Cor. vii. 12), although this was doubtless 
necessary, but to awaken the sleeping conscience of the Church to 
pass judgment in all cases of moral lapse, as was its inherent right 
and privilege. The Church at Corinth was an Apostolic Church, 
It had been founded by St. Paul. Though ‘‘absent in body” he 
was “present in spirit’? at the deliberations of its members (1 Cor. 
v. 3). And to vindicate the spiritual authority of the Church 
founded by him was, in effect, to vindicate his authority. Thus he 
can go so far as to say that the main purpose of his stern letter of 
rebuke (1 Cor.) was ἕνεκεν τοῦ φανερωθῆναι τὴν σπουδὴν ὑμῶν τὴν ὑπὲρ 
ἡμῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ (2 Cor. vii. 12, where see note). To 
manifest their zeal for St. Paul’s authority was to manifest their 
sense that Christian standards of living were widely different from 
heathen standards, and it was further to recognise that the Church 
has spiritual authority “to bind and to loose”. In exhibiting their 
zeal for him, their founder, they had made clear their recognition of 
this great principle. If it be said that to read this into 2 Cor. vii. 
12 is to go beyond the tenor of the words used, it must be replied 


1The subscription to 2 Corinthians, Πρὸς Κορινθίους δευτέρα ἐγράφη ἀπὸ 
Φιλίππων τῆς Μακεδονίας διὰ Τίτου καὶ Λουκᾶ, would be a confirmation of this 
conclusion, if any reliance could be placed on these colophons to the Epistles. 
See notes on 2 Cor, viii. 18, xiii. 14, 








a ec en, Te 
— a ta en ee 5 


INTRODUCTION 11 


that St. Paul’s language in the earlier letter sufficiently shows the 
high spiritual authority which he would have the Corinthians attach 
to the deliberate decisions of their assembled leaders. “In the 
name of our Lord Jesus, ye being gathered together, and my spirit, 
with the power of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor. v. 4). The words “ and 
my spirit” indicate not only his sympathy for them, but his assurance 
that the decisions to which such an assembly would be guided would 
be even as the decisions promulgated by his own apostolic authority 
which was “ not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus 
Christ and God the Father ”.} 

11. The second matter which Titus reported was not so satis- 
factory to St. Paul. Titus explained, as it would seem, that the’ 
Corinthians were much distressed at the news that the Apostle’s 
plans of travel had been changed (2 Cor. i. 16, 17), and that they 
were ready in consequence to impute to him instability of purpose 
which amounted to fickleness. St. Paul’s answer is found in 2 Cor. 
i, 23, ii. 4. He did not carry out his former intention of crossing 
direct from Ephesus to Corinth because he thought it better that 
there should be a short interval, during which they might mend 
their ways, before he again addressed them. His last visit (the 
“Intermediate Visit’) had been ἐν λύπῃ ; and it was undesirable that 
his next visit should be of the same character. So instead of visiting 
them at once, he wrote a severe letter (1 Cor.), and proceeded to 
Macedonia in the first instance, reserving his visit to Corinth until 
they should have had time to profit by his written rebukes. In this 
change of plan there was no display of fickleness; his one desire 
was to edify them and to do what was best for their true welfare. 

12. And, thirdly, Titus had no good news to bring about the 
factions in Corinth, concerning which St. Paul had already written 


(1 Cor. i. 12-18, iii. 1-6). When he despatched the First Canonical 


Epistle he was already aware that his authority had been called in 
question at Corinth, and that some were passing unfavourable judg- 
ments upon his acts (1 Cor. iv. 3-5). Already he had bidden the 
rebellious party not to be too ready to judge by the superficial appear- 
ance of things, but to distrust their hasty conclusions about him 
(1 Cor. iv. 5, 10-14). He had written mildly, but with authority, as 
became an Apostle. ‘‘ Be ye imitators of me” he had twice repeated 
(1 Cor. iv. 16, xi. 1). And he had assured them that when he came, 
as he certainly would come (1 Cor. xi. 34), to Corinth, those who had 
ventured to rebel would be treated with severity, if they did not 


1Gal. i. 1. 


12 INTRODUCTION 


repent (1 Cor. iv. 18-21). But Titus seems to have reported that 
the factious opposition to St. Paul’s authority was even more bitter 
than it was before 1 Corinthians was written. The Apostle’s post- 
ponement of his visit gave the malcontents courage to break out 
into open defiance (2 Cor. x. 10-12). 

13. On learning all these facts from Titus, in part consoling, in 
part most distressing, St. Paul wrote the Second Canonical Epistle 
to the Corinthians, associating the name of Timothy with his own 
in the address at the beginning.! The principal person entrusted 
with the carriage of the letter was, as was natural, Titus (2 Cor. viii. 
17), whose former mission had been so prudently and honourably 
discharged (2 Cor. xii. 17, 18). With Titus were associated two 


1 It will be convenient to state at this point the view of Timothy’s movements 
which has been adopted. We learn from 1 Cor, iv. 17, xvi. 10, that he was sup- 
posed by St. Paul to be on his way to Corinth when the First Canonical Epistle was 
written, and that the Apostle expected him to return to Ephesus with “ the brethren ” 
who were the bearers of that letter (1 Cor. xvi. 11), It does not appear that he was 
entrusted with any special mission to the Corinthian Church, the language of 1 Cor. 
iv. 17, “who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which be in Christ,” being 
suggestive rather of informal conference than of a formal embassy, and that of 
1 Cor. xvi. 10, 11 implying, as it would seem, that Timothy is to be welcomed at 
Corinth only as a passing visitor on his way back to the Apostle’s side. Now it is 
natural to identify this journey made by Timothy with that recorded in Acts xix. 22, 
where St. Paul is said during the last weeks of his stay in Ephesus to have “ sent 
into Macedonia two of them that ministered unto him, Timothy and Erastus”. 
Timothy had been associated with St. Paul on his first visit (about the year 50) to 
the cities of Macedonia (Acts xvii. 14, 15, xviii. 5), and he was evidently a suitable 
lieutenant to send in advance to prepare the way for the Apostle’s second visit. Most 
probably the business of the collection in Macedonia was entrusted to him to 
organise. And the date of this journey of Timothy to Macedonia (January or 
February, 55) well agrees with the date which must be assigned to the journey 
referred to in 1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 10. The plan seems‘to have been to visit the 
churches of Macedonia (this, the important purpose of the journey, is all that is 
mentioned in Acts) and then to return to Ephesus by sea from Corinth (this, as the 
only point in the journey interesting to the Corinthians, is alone mentioned in 
1 Cor.). Erastus, Timothy’s fellow-traveller on this occasion, bore the same name 
as the city treasurer at Corinth, whom we find there about February, 56 (Rom. xvi. 
23), as well as at a later period (2 Tim. iv. 20) ; and it is highly reasonable to identify 
him with this important member of the Corinthian Church, and to suppose that when 
we find him with Timothy he was on his way home. Timothy is also found at 
Corinth in St. Paul’s company when the Epistle to the Romans was written (Rom. 
xvi. 21); but we have nothing to show us whether or no he had got so far during 
the preceding spring. It is on the whole probable that he found so much to do in 
Macedonia that he stayed there during the whole spring and summer of 55 (so Light- 
foot, Biblical Essays, p.276f.). At any rate we meet with him next in Macedonia 
(and probably, as we have seen, at Philippi) in St. Paul’s company about the month 
of November, 55, when 2 Corinthians was despatched (2 Cor. i. 1). 











‘ . —s ὌΝ —_ - - 
πα τ δ΄. “τὰν το 


~ 





INTRODUCTION 13 


uthers, possibly Luke and Barnabas, but of their names we cannot 
be certain (2 Cor. viii. 18, 22, where see notes). The Epistle being 
despatched, St. Paul travelled slowly through Macedonia, arriving 
at Corinth in due course as he had promised (1 Cor. xvi. 5, 6), and 
staying there three months (Acts xx. 3). This period probably covered 
December, 55, and January and February, 56. In consequence of a 
Jewish plot he then returned through Macedonia instead of sailing 
direct for Syria as he had intended to do (Acts xx. 3); and starting 
from Philippi “after the days of unleavened bread” (Acts xx. 6), 
i.e., March 18-25, he arrived in Jerusalem in time for the Pentecost 
festival of the year 56. 

14. The account which has been given above of the sequence 
of events during St. Paul’s sojourn at Ephesus assumes that the 
First Canonical Epistle to the Corinthians is the “ Painful Letter ” 
to which the Apostle alludes in 2 Cor. ii. 4, vii. 8, 12; and it has 
been urged by several critics that it does not answer to the de- 
scription there given.1 The two allusions are as follows: “ Por 
out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you 
with many tears; not that ye should be made sorry, but that ye 
might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you” 
(2 Cor. ii. 4); and “ For though I made you sorry with my epistle, 
I do not regret it although 1 did regret ; for I see that that epistle 
made you sorry, though but for a season. . . . So although I wrote 
unto you, I! wrote not for his cause that did the wrong nor for his 
cause that suffered the wrong, but that your zeal on our behalf 
might be made manifest unto you in the sight of God” (2 Cor. vii. 
8, 12). It is said that “ from beginning to end of 1 Corinthians there 
are no traces of anguish of heart and much affliction, either in 
utterances expressing these feelings or in the style of the Epistle 
itself”’.2 1 believe that the passages which have been quoted in 
§ 8 demonstrate the inaccuracy of any such assertion. Critics have 
strangely overlooked in this connexion the fact that chaps. vii.-xvi. of 
1 Corinthiansare mainly taken up with answering the queries which his 
correspondents had put to St. Paul; and that the body of the letter 
proper is contained in chaps. i.-vi. It is in these earlier chapters that 
we are to look for traces of mental anguish and depression, and I hold 
that they are plainly there to be found, and that the note of identi- 
fication afforded by 2 Cor. ii. 4 is answered by such passages 


1 E.g., this objection was raised by Klépper (1870) and has been repeated by 
Waite in the Speaker's Commentary, by Robertson (Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, 
vol. i., p. 494) and by Kennedy (2 and 3 Corinthians, p. 64 £.), as well as by others. 

2 Kennedy, loc. cit., p. 65. 


14 INTRODUCTION 


as 1 Cor. iii. 12-15, iv. 11-13, v. 1-6, 13, vi. 5, 9-11. Had the structure 
of 1 Corinthians been sufficiently attended to, I cannot think that 
this objection would ever have seemed forcible. And so with 2 
Cor. vii. 8. It has been urged against the identification of the 
« Painful Letter ” with 1 Corinthians that “it is scarcely comprehen- 
sible that St. Paul should have said, even in a moment of strong 
excitement, of so costly a monument of Christian truth as the First 
Epistle is, that he repented for a while of ever having written it ’’.} 
But this is to exaggerate the measure of the Apostle’s regret. He 
merely says (2 Cor. vii. 8) that fora moment he regretted having 
given them pain by what he had written, i.e., he regretted the 
severe sentences which he had penned; but not that he lamented 
the composition of the whole Epistle. The earlier part of the 
Epistle, which is, 1 repeat, the core of the letter, is extremely 
severe, and especially chaps. v. and vi.2_ In the phrase ‘‘ the Painful 
Letter” there is, in fact, a latent fallacy. The language of 2 Cor. ii. 
4, vii. 8, would be sufficiently accounted for if any part of the letter 
to which he refers seemed to St. Paul (for the moment) to be unduly 
severe, or if any section of it had caused unexpected grief to the 
Corinthians. 

15. An objection of a somewhat similar character is that the 
language used in 2 Cor. ii. 6-11 cannot be taken as referring to the 
punishment of the offender of 1 Cor. v. 1-5, inasmuch as the mild 
treatment suggested by St. Paul in the later Epistle would be quite 
inadequate to the offence.* Not to dwell on the fact that unrelenting 
severity is not a Christian virtue, and that Titus may have reported 
some extenuating circumstances of which we know nothing, I believe 
that the considerations brought forward above in § 10 go a long 
way to break the force of this objection. The intimate connexion 
between the fifth and sixth chapters of 1 Corinthians has not been 
sufficiently recognised by commentators, and thus the primary pur- 
pose of St. Paul’s message of rebuke has been misconceived. He 
was more anxious to awaken the sleeping conscience of the Church 
at Corinth, and to prevail upon its members to exercise their powers 
of spiritual discipline, than to adjudicate between the wronged father 
and the offending son. Excommunication was the only suitable 
penalty for the latter’s grave offence, but St. Paul had never meant 


1 Waite, Speaker’s Commentary, p. 383. 

2Compare also the great severity of the incidental remark in 1 Cor. xv. 2 
ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ εἰκῆ ἐπιστεύσατε. That he should suggest such a possibility show; 
how much he is depressed as he writes. 

‘This is urged by Schmiedel and Jiilicher amongst others, 














INTRODUCTION ις 


to convey (although the Corinthians had misunderstood his counsel) 
that the ban could not be taken off by the same authority which 
had imposed it, if evidence of penitence were forthcoming. Indeed 
the identification of ὁ ἀδικήσας in 2 Cor. vii. 12 with the offender of 
1 Cor. v. 1 seems to be not doubtful when the language and purport 
of the earlier passage are considered. I have already pointed out 
(§ 10) that the aim of the Apostle in writing 1 Cor. v. and vi. was not 
merely that the offender should be excommunicated, but that the 
scandal of such a case being brought by Christians before a heathen 
court should be avoided. Consider, further, St. Paul’s language. 
Some persons, he says (1 Cor. iv. 18, 19), ‘‘were puffed up” 
(ἐφυσιώθησαν) as though he were not coming; 1.e., they made little 
of his authority in his absence. The same word (πεφυσιωμένοι) is 
used (1 Cor. v. 2) of the action, or rather the inaction, of the 
Christian community in reference to the case of incest; and in this 
matter he declares ‘‘ Your boasting is not good” (οὐ καλὸν τὸ καύχημα 
ὑμῶν, 1 Cor. v. 6). That is to say, their καύχημα consisted in their 
resistance to his apostolic authority; they were “ puffed up,” and so 
they had not dealt with the offender as they would have done had 
they followed his teachings (1 Cor. v. 2). It is with reference to this 
that he says in the later letter, εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ἔγραψα, iva γνῶ τὴν 
δοκιμὴν ὑμῶν, εἰ εἰς πάντα ὑπήκοοί ἐστε (2 Cor. ii. 9). Again, the 
sentence which he directs to be pronounced upon the offender is 
παραδοῦναι τὸν τοιοῦτον TH Σατανᾷ εἰς ὄλεθρον τῆς σαρκός (1 Cor. v. 5); but 
when he bids them be merciful and forgive, his reason is ἵνα μὴ 
πλεονεκτηθῶμεν ὑπὸ τοῦ Σατανᾶ (2 Cor. ii. 11). The man was only 
«delivered over to Satan,” eis ὄλεθρον τῆς σαρκός (1 Cor. v. 5); but 
care must be taken lest Satan rob the Church of his soul (2 Cor. ii. 
11). The reference to Satan in the later Epistle is pointless, unless 
we bear in mind the tenor of the sentence in the earlier one. And 
there is another phrase perhaps worthy of attention. The offender is 
called ὁ ἀδικήσας in 2 Cor. vii. 12, and the injured person is ὁ ἀδικηθείς. 
If we turn back to 1 Cor. vi. we find that the words ἀδικεῖν and 
ἄδικος (1 Cor. vi. 8, 9) are specially used of the carnal offences which 
St. Paul has there in view. The point of his rebuke in that chapter 
is that it would have been better for the offended father to have 
suffered wrong (ἀποστερεῖσθε ; cf. for the force of this 1 Cor. vii. 5) 
than to have brought the matter before the heathen tribunals. And 
when St. Pau! speaks of the Corinthians as having proved them- 
selves in the end to be dyvods τῷ πράγματι (2 Cor. vii. 11), the last 
words recall the ἐν τῷ πράγματι of 1 Thess. iv. 6, where the refer- 
ence is to adultery, the language used being strikingly like that of 


16 INTRODUCTION 


1 Cor. vi. 8. There are also some other links connecting the ‘‘ Painful 
Letter’’ with 1 Corinthians which should not be overlooked. In 
2 Cor. ii. 4 St. Paul is careful to explain that the letter which was 
written with tears was written οὐχ ἵνα λυπηθῆτε, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀγάπην ἵνα 
γνῶτε ἣν ἔχω περισσοτέρως εἰς ὑμᾶς. It might be expected therefore 
that the Painful Letter should exhibit some trace οὗ this overflowing 
ἀγάπη. And such a trace is conspicuously present in the last words 
of 1 Corinthians, ἡ ἀγάπη pou μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ (1 Cor. 
xvi. 24). No other letter of St. Paul’s has so affectionate a farewell. 
It was plainly added for some special reason. But if we identify this 
letter with the “ Painful Letter,” 2 Cor. ii. 4 gives an excellent reason 
for its addition. And, once more, the reference in 2 Cor. iii. 1 f. te 
a former self-commendation which the Apostle had indited finds its 
best and simplest explanation if we bring it into connexion with 
1 Cor. ix. 1 f. ; 

16. Something must now be said about other schemes of re- 
construction of the history which have been proposed by recent 
writers. It is unnecessary to rehearse them 811,1 but the discussion 
of one or two of the most plausible may serve to bring the difficulties 
of the problem into clearer relief, and to supply tests by which the 
adequacy of the solution that has been adopted may be estimated. 
In England, the editor of 1 Corinthians in this Commentary, Pro- 
fessor Findlay,? and Professor Sanday*® (not to speak of German 
writers) interpolate a second lost letter from St. Paul to the Corin- 
thians between the First and Second Canonical Epistles. They hold 
it probable that the embassy of Timothy to Corinth vid Macedonia 
{Acts xix. 22, 1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 10) succeeded so far as this, that 
Timothy reached Corinth, but that his mission was not a success as 
regards the healing of disorders there. In consequence of the bad 
report brought back by Timothy, St. Paul wrote a second lost letter 
and sent it by the more capable hands of Titus.* It is the return of 
Titus from this mission which St. Paul awaited with such anxiety at 
Troas (2 Cor. i. 13), and the missive which Titus bore was the 
Painful Letter to which the Apostle alludes in 2 Cor. ii. 4, vii. 8. 


1An elaborate account of the various theories which have been propounded 
will be found in an article by Hilgenfeld in his Zeitschrift fir wissenschaftliche 
Theologie (1899), and a comparative table is given by Schmiedel in the Hand 
Kommentar, pp. viii, ix. Cf. also Jilicher’s Einleitung for a good discussion. 

*See vol. ii., p. 736 f., and Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. iii., p. 711 ff., 5.2, 
* Paul” 

ὃ Encycl, Biblica, vol. i., p. got f. 

‘On this hypothesis Titus was not the bearer of 1 Corinthians. 








INTRODUCTION 17 


Another scheme agreeing with this, in so far as it refuses to identify 
the Painful Letter with 1 Corinthians, has recently been expounded by 
Dr. Robertson.! This writer holds that after the despatch of 1 Corin- 
thians by the hands of Titus, St. Paul changed the plan of travel 
announced in that letter (1 Cor. xvi. 5) and decided to take the 
route Ephesus—Corinth—Macedonia—Corinth, which would give 
the Corinthians a δευτέρα χαρά; that painful news having been 
brought back by Titus from Corinth, the Apostle reverted to the 
plan announced in 1 Cor. xvi. 5, as he was unwilling to visit Corinth 
so soon under the circumstances; that he wrote a severe letter, 
now lost, of which Titus was again the bearer; and that it was 
on Titus’ report of the result of this second mission that 2 
Corinthians was written and entrusted to the same capable 
messenger. 

17. On both these theories the same observation may be made 
at the outset. They are highly complicated. Quite apart in the 
one case from the assumption (for which there is no evidence) that 
Timothy reached Corinth and that his mission there was a failure, 
and from the assumption in the other case® that the language of 
2 Cor. i. 15 cannot be explained unless we suppose St. Paul to have 
changed his mind as to his route twice after the despatch of 1 Corin- 
thians, both theories presuppose events and documents of which no 
historical trace has survived. Doubtless we must not assume that all 
the facts have been recorded ; it may be necessary to introduce some 
hypotheses in order to co-ordinate the fragments of history at our 
disposal. Nevertheless, the theory which depends on the fewest hypo- 
theses has the best claim to acceptance, provided that it covers the 
facts. Now the writers whose theories have been indicated in § 16 
agree in interpolating a letter between 1 Corinthians and 2 Corin- 
thians, which has utterly vanished out of knowledge. Such an 
interpolated letter was suggested by Bleek as long ago as 1830, and 
its actuality has been assumed by many critics since in Germany as 
wellas in England. No doubt the phenomena may be accounted for 
by an artifice of this sort. We may put anything we please into a 
letter of which we know nothing; there is no way of proving our 
speculations to be wrong. But the necessity for so large an hypo- 
thesis must be glaringly evident before the hypothesis can be justified. 


1 Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 495, 5.0. “2 Corinthians ’”’, 

2 Dr. Sanday seems also to favour this idea of a double change of intention as 
to his route on the part of St, Paul (Encycl. Btblica, vol. i., p. 903). See § 16 
above. 


VOL. IIL 2 


18 INTRODUCTION 


And it has not been proved, as we have seen (§§ 14, 15), that the 
‘‘ Painful Letter” of 2 Cor. ii. 4, vii. 8, cannot have been the First 
Canonical Epistle to the Corinthians. It is upon this supposed 
impossibility that the whole edifice of theory rests, and the base does 
not appear—to the present writer at least—to be broad enough to 
bear the superstructure, 




















CHAPTER Il. 
THE INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE, 


1. Our discussion has hitherto taken for granted the unity of 
the Epistle (2 Cor.) with which we have to do. But this has been 
repeatedly questioned, and the arguments alleged in support of the 
composite character of the document require to be considered in 
detail. So far back as 1767 Semler urged that the Epistle could be 
resolved into three parts: (1) chaps. i.-viii. + Rom. xvi. 1-20 + chap. 
xiii. 11-13; (2) chaps. x.-xiii. 10; (3) chap. ix.; of which he held (2) 
to be posterior to (1). After a struggling existence the analysis 
attracted fresh interest when Hausrath in 1870 took it up in part 
and advocated the distinctness of chaps. x.-xiii. from chaps. i.-ix. 
Schmiedel (in the Hand Kommentar) defended this view in 1890, 
and Clemen has since adopted it, and indeed regards it as an 
established result of criticism.1 The theory has not had many 
advocates in England, but it has been vigorously supported by Dr. 
J. H. Kennedy in his work entitled The Second and Third Epistles 
to the Corinthians (1900). By no writer has the matter been more 
carefully and acutely investigated, and his arguments demand 
attention. 

2. Dr. Kennedy’s view of the sequence of events during St. 
Paul’s stay at Ephesus is as follows: 1. Titus was sent on 
a mission to Corinth to preach and to continue St. Paul’s work 
(2 Cor. xii. 18) at some period after the Apostle’s first visit (Acts 
xvili.1), 2. Lost Letter tothe Corinthians. 3. Mission of Timothy 
to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 5). 4. 1 Corinthians written from 
Ephesus about April, 54. 5. St. Paul stayed at Ephesus because 
of the greatness of the opportunity there (1 Cor. xvi. 8). 6. He 
formed a fixed purpose of visiting Jerusalem with the offerings 
which were being collected (Acts xix. 21). 7. Bad news came 
from Corinth. 8. St. Paul accordingly paid a brief disciplinary visit 


1See Theologische Literaturzeitung, 22nd Dec., 1900; and cf. Clemen’s work 
entitled Die Einheitlichkeit d. paulin. Briefe. 


20 INTRODUCTION 


to that city. 9. On his return he wrote from Ephesus the Painful 
Letter, of which the end is preserved to us in 2 Cor. x.-xiii. 10. 
Mission of Timothy to Macedonia (Acts xix. 22). 11. Mission of 
Titus to Corinth to subdue the rebels there. 12. On Titus’ report of 
the success of his mission St. Paul wrote from Macedonia about 
November, 55, a letter of which we have the beginning preserved 
in 2 Cor. i.-ix., the rest being lost. 13. This letter was forwarded 
to Corinth by Titus and two unnamed companions, the bearers being 
entrusted also with the business of the collection (2 Cor. viii. 6). 
It will be recognised at once that this is a highly complicated 
scheme. Dr. Kennedy has to assume three missions of Titus to 
Corinth instead of two, the number which commentators have 
generally recognised; and he has, in like manner, to find room for 
two missions of Timothy, one to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17) and a second, 
quite distinct from this, to Macedonia (Acts xix. 21). In addition, 
he has to push back the date of 1 Corinthians by a year, in order 
to give time for all the incidents of which he finds traces in the 
Epistles; and he splits up 2 Corinthians into two fragmentary 
letters. We shall consider these points separately. 

3. First, then, as to the missions of Titus. Dr. Kennedy takes 
in close connexion the two verses 2 Cor. viii. 6, 7, and translates 
(p. 122), “1 summoned (? exhorted) Titus that as he had made a 
beginning, so he might accomplish in you this grace also; yea that as 
ye abound in everything, in faith and utterance, and in all diligence, 
and in your love towards us, so ye may abound in this grace also”, 
This translation is probably right (see note in loc.) ; but the inference 
which its author derives from it is by no means inevitable. Dr. 
Kennedy holds that the words prove that the furtherance of the 
collection for Jerusalem was the purpose of Titus’ later visit only, 
and formed no part of his commission in the earlier visit. But 
this cannot be maintained. Such an interpretation will harmonise 
with Dr. Kennedy’s scheme of Titus’ visits (see above); but the 
passage is quite consistent with the other view that Titus’ two visits 
to Corinth were made as the bearer of the two Canonical Epistles, 
For in what St. Paul says, the emphasis is on the contrast between 
προενήρξατο and ἐπιτελέσῃ. A beginning had been made by Titus in 
the matter of the collection; he is now to finish his work, that the 
Corinthians may be as conspicuous for their liberality as they already 
are for other graces. Dr. Kennedy objects to this that it is incon- 
ceivable that St. Paul when sending Titus with a strong message 
of rebuke should also have instructed him to obtain money contribu- 
tions. ‘Such a course,” he says, “ would have been as inconsistent 











INTRODUCTION 21 


with wise diplomacy as with the self-respect which formed so marked 
a feature in St. Paul’s character.”! But to argue thus is to over- 
look the fact that St. Paul’s instructions about the collection in 1 
Cor. xvi. 1-5 were given in answer to queries addressed to him on 
the subject by the Church of Corinth. The first part of the letter 
which Titus carried was taken up with rebuke; but there was 
nothing undiplomatic in the fact that St. Paul sent his answers to 
these queries by the same hand. In fact to have withheld his 
answer would have only given offence.? 

4, We have now to consider the evidence adduced for the dis- 
section of 2 Corinthians. First, it is urged that there is not only a 
change of tone at x. 1, but that the way in which the chapter opens 
shows that something has been lost which immediately preceded it. 
Αὐτὸς δὲ ἐγὼ are the first words, and δέ (it is said) marks an anti- 
thesis. The passage “contains an allusion to an objection which 
had been brought against the Apostle, which it brings before us 
not as if the subject were now for the first time introduced, but 
as if it had been already mentioned”.? Rather should we say that δέ 
marks the transition to a new subject, a usage to which we have 
an exact parallel in viii. 1 of this very Epistle; where after the 
words which conclude chap. vii., χαίρω ὅτι ἐν παντὶ θαρρῶ ἐν ὑμῖν, St. 
Paul passes to his next topic with the words γνωρίζομεν δὲ ὑμῖν. 
Another parallel is found at 1 Cor. xv. 1, where in like manner a 
new subject is introduced by the words γνωρίζω δὲ ὑμῖν. It is 
unnecessary to assume, as some have done, that the change of 
tone here was caused by the arrival at this point of a messenger 
from Corinth bringing tidings later and less favourable than that 
brought by Titus. This may, indeed, be so; but the hypothesis 
is not needed. It is hardly likely that any of St. Paul’s more 
important letters were written or dictated at a single sitting ; and 
the change of tone is sufficiently accounted for by a change of mood 
such as every busy and over-burdened man is subject to, especially 


1 Loc. cit., p. 124. 

2 These considerations also break the force of Dr. Kennedy’s main argument 
for the early date of 1 Corinthians. It is plain that the business of the collection 
had been set on foot before the date of that letter, in which counsel is given as to 
the best method of carrying it on; and thus the phrase ἀπὸ πέρυσι (2 Cor. viii. Io, 
ix. 2), in which so much difficulty has been found, receives adequate explanation. 
The Corinthians would truly be said in November, 55, to have “ made a beginning ” 
a year ago, and St. Paul’s boast to the Macedonian Christians that Achaia had been 
‘prepared for a year past’? was quite justifiable (see note in /oc.). 

3 Kennedy, Joc. cit., p. 96. 


22 INTRODUCTION 


if his health is not very robust (cf. 2 Cor. i. 8, 9, and xii. 7). The 
Second Epistle to the Corinthians is not a formal treatise like 
the Epistle to the Romans; it is a personal letter, and in such 
letters we have no reason to expect either systematic arrangement 
of topics or pedantically uniform treatment. 

5. This consideration helps us, too, to dispose of the difficulty 
that the Jast four chapters contemplate an openly rebellious minority 
at Corinth, the existence of which is not emphasised in the first 
nine chapters. It was entirely natural that Titus’ report being 
of a mixed character, partly good and partly bad, St. Paul’s letter 
based upon it should show traces at once of his gratification and 
of his grief. And, indeed, chaps. i.-ix. are not without indications that 
his authority was not cheerfully accepted by all the Corinthian 
Christians. His defence against the charge of fickleness (i. 15-17) 
shows that the charge had been made; the mention of οἱ πλείονες in 
ii. 6 (cf. iv. 15) shows that a minority did not heartily concur in 
the sentence which was inflicted, although, as a matter of fact, all 
had acquiesced in his view that the Church should take cognisance 
of the moral scandal which had occurred;! he more than hints 
in ii. 17 that ot πολλοί make merchandise of the word of God, 
and his remark loses point if none such were to be found at Corinth ; 
that τινες, ‘some persons,” make use of commendatory letters (iii. 1) 
is brought up to their disparagement ; the comparison between the 
ministries of the Old and New Covenants in iii. 6 f. is indirectly 
aimed at the Judaising party (xi. 22, 23); so, too, those who boast 
ἐν προσώπῳ καὶ οὐ καρδίᾳ (v. 12) are his Corinthian opponents ; and, 
lastly, the force of the antitheses in vi. 8-10 depends on the fact 
that corresponding statements to his discredit were being made 
at Corinth. The situation was simply this. The Church as a whole 
(and, indeed, unanimously, cf. vii. 15, 16) had taken the action 
he desired in the case of the offender; but there remained a 
turbulent minority who resisted his authority in other matters. The 
evil of unchastity does not here need special consideration; it was 
always present at Corinth. 

6. It is time to adduce the passages upon which defenders of the 
theory that chaps. x.-xiii. constitute a part of the Painful Letter 
mainly depend. The case is best put by Dr. Kennedy,? who produces 


11 cannot think that Dr. Kennedy’s view (loc. cit., p. 102) that the ‘* minority ” 
here indicated were out-and-out supporters of St. Paul who were anxious to go 
farther even than he, will commend itself to many minds. 

2 Loc. cit., p. 81 f. 


ee ὁσδδς, ϑσσο σαν, 





— 


2 a 
—— τὸ 


| 
συν ks 


᾿ _—" 
Mico oe rie 
‘a 








Se ae Eg ee a Sa -- 
=: ee a ὧἂὐς ae eg 
χ —— iii = a 


~ 


iT 
i 
a 
* 
{ 
ἥ 
ΧΩ 
η 
ἢ 
a 
, 
ia 
fi 
‘ 
εἶ 
we 
ἢ] 
Li 
" 
J 
Ly 
oy: 4 
A 
3 
¢ 
Ἄ 
ἣ my 
\. Hia® 
we 


γ᾿. r= - 


INTRODUCTION 23 


three pairs of parallels between the first nine and the last four 
chapters of the Epistle. (a) In xiii. 10 the Apostle wrote διὰ τοῦτο 
ταῦτα ἀπὼν γράφω, iva παρὼν μὴ ἀποτόμως χρήσωμαι ; and to this it is 
said that ii. 3, καὶ ἔγραψα τοῦτο αὐτὸ, ἵνα μὴ ἐλθὼν λύπην ἔχω, refers. 
But this reference is by no means inevitable; it is quite as natural 
to suppose that the effect of the Painful Letter (which | take to be 
1 Corinthians) having been so salutary, as is indicated in ii, 3, the 
Apostle would again try the effect of a written threat of severe dealing. 
(Ὁ) In xiii. 2 we have προείρηκα καὶ προλέγω ὡς παρὼν τὸ δεύτερον καὶ 
ἀπὼν νῦν τοῖς προημαρτηκόσιν καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, ὅτι ἐὰν ἔλθω εἰς τὸ . 
πάλιν οὐ φείσομαι, to which i. 23 corresponds well if we suppose it 
written at a later date, viz., φειδόμενος ὑμῶν οὐκέτι ἦλθον εἰς Κόρινθον. 
On the other hand, it is plain that the texts may be taken up by 
another handle; and we may understand their sequence to be that 
the Apostle having said at i. 23 that he had not come to Corinth 
before as he wished to spare them, he explains at xiii. 2 with plain 
sternness that when he does come he will not spare. There is 
nothing gained in lucidity or in force by the hypothesis that xiii. 2 
represents the earlier statement and i. 23 the later. (c) Again, in x. 6, 
St. Paul says of himself: ἐν ἑτοίμῳ ἔχοντες ἐκδικῆσαι πᾶσαν παρακοήν, 
ὅταν πληρωθῇ ὑμῶν ἡ ὑπακοή, while at ii. 9 he writes, εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ 
ἔγραψα ἵνα γνῶ τὴν δοκιμὴν ὑμῶν, εἰ εἰς πάντα ὑπήκοοί ἐστε. Here it is 
not to be gainsaid that an excellent sense emerges from counting 
x. 6 to be prior to ii. 9, which seems, when taken in connexion with 
vii. 15, 16, to speak of unanimous obedience on the part of the 
Christians at Corinth. But the character of this obedience has 
been indicated above in § 4. So far as the specific case as to 
which St. Paul had written the Painful Letter was concerned, the 
“ obedience”’ had been that of “all”; but there remained a faction 
which was disobedient at heart, and until they should have yielded 
to his authority it could not be said that their ‘‘ obedience” was 
“fulfilled”. As to these three pairs of parallel passages, then, it is not 
the case that a satisfactory explanation can be provided only by the ex- 
pedient of recognising chaps. x.-xili. as prior to chaps. i.-ix.; on the 
contrary, they yield a consistent sense when the Epistle is inter- 
preted as a continuous whole. A remarkable commentary upon the 
danger of relying too much on coincidences of language of this sort 
is afforded by the fact that exactly an opposite inference to that 
with which we have been dealing has been drawn by another critic, 
Drescher. This writer, like Schmiedel and Clemen and Kennedy, 
regards chaps. x.-xiii. as distinct from chaps. i.-ix.; but he is led from 
internal evidence, as it appears to him, to count the Nine Chapters 


24 INTRODUCTION 


as earlier in date than the Four.! When internal evidence leads 
competent scholars to such entirely divergent conclusions, it is a 
natural inference that the arguments on which they rely do not 
amount to demonstration. 

7. It is further to be borne in mind that the theory which regards 
chaps. i.-ix. and chaps. x.-xiii. as parts of distinct letters which have 
been joined together by mistake depends on the concurrence of several 
improbable hypotheses. We have to suppose not only that chaps. i.-ix. 
are a fragment of a longer letter which has lost its concluding pages, 
and that chaps. x.-xiii. are a fragment of a longer letter which has lost 
its opening pages, but that in each case the mutilation happened to 
come at a point where a new sentence began a new page. This isa 
most unlikely thing to happen. Take any book or manuscript at 
random and count the number of places where the tearing away of 
pages does not leave a clause incomplete. The number will be small 
indeed.?- But the measure of the improbability of this happening 
must be twice repeated before we reach the improbability of 2 Cor. 
i.-ix. and 2 Cor, x.-xiii. being both fragments. For neither 2 Cor. 
ix. 15 nor 2 Cor. x. 1 is an incomplete sentence. It has been argued 
indeed (see above, ὃ 4) that 2 Cor. x. 1, αὐτὸς δὲ ἐγὼ. . . , points to 
some preceding argument which is not to be found in 2 Cor. ix. 
The argument is unconvincing; but what is here dealt with is the 
improbability that a tearing of the MS. should have left no trace on 
the grammatical coherence of the sentence which followed the 
mutilation. In fact, it is not too much to say that the phenomena 
of the existing document cannot be explained as resulting from the 
mere juxtaposition of two fragments of other letters. We have to 
postulate, in addition, an editor who trimmed the ragged edges and 
brought the end of chap. ix. and the beginning of chap. x. into 
grammatical sequence by emendation of the texts which the two 
fragments presented. And beside all this we have yet to reckon 
with the improbability, be it great or small, that the two fragments 
belonging to distinct letters should have become joined together 
under the mistaken impression that they were parts of one whole. 


1 Studien und Kritiken, Jan., 1897. Krenkel takes the same view, and holds 
that chaps. x.-xiii. form a letter later in date than chaps. i.-ix. This was also 
Semler’s view. 

*A good illustration is afforded by the end of St. Mark’s Gospel. It is generally 
(though not universally) believed that a page has been lost at the end, and that the 
present conclusion is by another hand. But one of the strongest arguments for this 
view is that ver. 8 is incomplete, and that it ends ἐφοβοῦντο γάρ, i.e., “ for they were 
afraidto...”. There is no such incompleteness apparent at 2 Cor. ix. 15. 


ii ea ee ee ena ee γος are 








+ 


μον ἢ 


INTRODUCTION 25 


Under these circumstances we fall back on the prima facie case, 
which is that the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is an ens 
integrum, and we proceed to bring forward some of the positive 
lata which point to its unity. 

8. First, attention should be directed to passages in chaps. x.- 
xiii. which point back to passages in chaps. i.-ix. (a) In xi. 15 St. 
Paul writes that the false apostles, whom he calls Satan’s διάκονοι, 
are trying to pass themselves off as διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης, 7.€., as 
ἀπόστολοι Χριστοῦ (ver. 13). Now there is nothing in the context to 
suggest such a phrase as διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης, and it does not, as a 
matter of fact, occur in any other of St. Paul’s letters or in the 
N.T. outside this Epistle or in the LXX. The one passage which 
explains it is iii. 7-11, where the Ministry of the Old Covenant is 
declared to be less glorious than that of the New, and where ἡ 
διακονία τῆς δικαιοσύνης is set over against ἡ διακονία τῆς κατακρίσεως. 
Unless the readers of xi. 15 were aware that St. Paul used the phrase 
“the ministry of Righteousness ” as descriptive of the ministry of the 
Gospel, the title διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης would have had no special mean- 
ing for them. Thus we conclude that the discussion of iii. 7-11 is 
presupposed by the use of the title in xi. 15. (δ) The charge which 
his opponents brought against St. Paul at Corinth is thus described 
by him in xii. 16, ὑπάρχων πανοῦργος δόλῳ ὑμᾶς ἔλαβον. They had 
called him a πανοῦργος, ‘‘a crafty man,” and suggested that his 
dealings in the matter of money were full of guile (δόλος). At iv, 2 
he refers to the same charge, μὴ περιπατοῦντες ἐν πανουργίᾳ μηδὲ 
δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ. The meaning of the latter clause, 
“handling deceitfully the word of God,” is fixed by the parallel in 
li. 17, καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, which shows that the δόλος 
repudiated by him was crooked dealing in regard to money, “ making 
a traffic” of the Gospel. (c) The passages just cited from the earlier 
part of the letter have other echoes in the later part. In ii. 17 
those who make merchandise of the word of God at Corinth are 
οἱ πολλοὶ, and he speaks of his opponents again as πολλοί in xi. 18. 
His declaration in ii. 17 is that he preaches ἐξ εἰλικρινείας (cf. i. 12), 
and in iv. 2 that it is τῇ φανερώσει τῆς ἀληθείας ; so in xi. 6 he says 


_ οὗ himself, ἐν παντὶ φανερώσαντες ἐν πᾶσιν εἰς ὑμᾶς. And, lastly, the 


asseveration of his sincerity in ii. 17, κατέναντι Θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν, 
is repeated in xii. 19, the only other place where it occurs in his 
Epistles. (d) In x. 5 he speaks of bringing every thought into 
Captivity, eis τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, and of his readiness to avenge 
all disobedience, ὅταν πληρωθῇ ὑμῶν ἡ ὑπακοή. Seven verses before, 
in ix. 13, he had written of the ὑποταγὴ τῆς ὁμολογίας ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ 


26 INTRODUCTION 


εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ; and the language is sufficiently similar to 
suggest that x. 5 was written while the phrases of ix. 13 were still 
in his mind. (6) The concluding summary of the Epistle (xiii. 11) 
is important (see note in loc.). The exhortations yatpere... 
παρακαλεῖσθε are specially noteworthy, for they exactly reproduce 
the two leading thoughts of its earlier part, Rejoice .. . be com- 
forted. It is difficult to understand how the words are to be 
explained on the hypothesis that they sum up the message of the 
Painful Letter. They are entirely harmonious with chaps. i.-ix., 
but not harmonious at all with chaps. x.-xiii. “Comfort in affliction” 
is (as Dr. Plummer points out!) the keynote of the first part of 
the Epistle, “boasting in weakness” being the keynote of the 
second part. παρακαλεῖσθε is an appropriate summing up of much 
that is contained in chaps. i.-ix., but is irrelevant as regards chaps. 
x.-xlii.2 And thus, as we find in xiii. 11 a summary of 2 Corinthians 
as a whole, we conclude that it is a single document, and is not 
made up of parts of two letters which have been joined together 
by mistake. 

9. In the next place the linguistic parallels between chaps. i.-ix. 
and chaps. x.-xiii. are in many instances so close as to render it 
difficult to believe that the Epistle is not an ens integrum. (a) 
The phrase ἑαυτὸν συνιστάνειν only occurs once in the N.T. outside 
2 Corinthians, viz., at Gal. ii. 18, and there the meaning is quite 
different (παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν συνιστάνω = “1 prove myself a trans- 
gressor’’) from anything in 2 Corinthians. Not only does the phrase 
occur in both parts of this Epistle (iii. 1, v. 12, x. 12, 18), but it 
always implies a bad kind of self-commendation, as contrasted with 
the similar phrase συνιστάνειν ἑαυτὸν (iv. 2, vi. 4, vii. 11), which is 
used throughout in a favourable sense. (b) ὑπόστασις only occurs 
twice in St. Paul, and each time in the same phrase, ἐν τῇ ὑποστάσει 
ταύτῃ [5.6.,) τῆς καυχήσεως), which is found once in the earlier (ix. 4) 
and once in the later (xi. 17) part of 2 Corinthians. (c) St. Paul 
uses ταπεινός Of himself in vii. 6 and x. 1; the word only occurs 
once again in the Pauline letters (Rom. xii. 16). (4) νόημα occurs 
five times in 2 Corinthians and in both parts of the Epistle (ii. 11, 
iii. 14, iv. 4, x. 5, xi. 3), and is always used in a bad sense. In 
the only other place of its occurrence in the N.T. (Phil. iv. 7) 
there is no suggestion that νοήματα must be bad. (e) ἀγρυπνία 


1Smith’s Bible Dictionary, vol. i., p. 657. 
2Semler seems to have had some suspicion of this, for he joins on chap, xiii. 
11-13 to the first part of the Epistle in his scheme of dissection, 








INTRODUCTION 27 


occurs in vi. § and xi. 27, but nowhere else in the N.T. (/) mpoo- 
ἀναπληροῦν occurs in ix. 12 and xi. 9, but nowhere else in the N.T. 
(g) ἕτοιμος occurs both in ix. 5 and x. 6, 16; only once again in St. 
Paul (Tit. iii. 1). (4) δυνατεῖν is found in ix. 8 and xiii. 3; only 
once again in St. Paul (Rom. xiv. 4). (7) θαρρεῖν occurs in v. 6, 8, 
vii. 16 and x. 1, 2, but not elsewhere in St. Paul. It is true that 
in x. 1, 2 it is used to express stern confidence in himself (θαρρῶ εἰς 
ὑμᾶς), and in vii. 16 to express hopeful confidence in his corre- 
spondents (θαρρῶ ἐν ὑμῖν) ; but this does not alter the fact that he 
does not use the word in any sense in any other Epistle. (7) 
πλεονεκτεῖν Occurs in ii. 11, vii. 2 and xii. 17, 18; only again in St. 
Paul in 1 Thess. iv.6. (k) παρακαλεῖν occurs thirteen times in chaps. 
j.-ix. and four times in chaps. x.-xiil.; that is, with unusual frequency 
in both parts of the Epistle. It is the word used throughout of the 
Apostle’s directions to Titus (viii. 6, 17, ix. 5 and xii. 17). Other 
words and phrases occur with marked frequency in both parts of 
the Epistle, such as ἐν παντί, καυχάομαι, περισσότερος (-ws), etc. ; 
but while such phenomena fall in with the conclusion we have 
already reached, they are hardly significant enough to be registered 
as supplying independent arguments. But, on the whole, the 
linguistic facts powerfully support the traditional view, viz., that 
the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is a single document and not 
a patchwork of two or more detached pieces. 

10. It is further to be borne in mind that neither MSS. nor 
versions lend any countenance to these disintegrating theories. 
They all, from the earliest times, treat the Epistle as a whole, as 
Irenzeus explicitly does more than once. He quotes ii. 15, 16 (Her., 
IV., xxviii., 3) and xiii. 7, 9 (He@r., V., iii., 1) as alike contained in the 
secunda ad Corinthios. No doubt the union of fragments is sup- 
posed to have taken place long before his time. Nevertheless the 
fact that there is no trace of it in literature is significant. “Τῆς 
attestation of the N.T. text is so varied and so early that a displace- 
ment of this magnitude could hardly fail to bear traces of itself.” } 

11, One section of the Epistle (vi. 14-vii. 1) has been regarded 
as an interpolation by many writers who accept the Epistle in other 
respects as a complete document from the hand of St. Paul. And 
it is not to be denied that this section comes in awkwardly in its 
present place. It is much more like what we would expect a frag- 
ment of the Lost Letter (1 Cor. v. 9) to be than a genuine part of 
the Epistle before us. Nevertheless, I am not satisfied that a case 


‘ Sanday, Encycl. Biblica, vol. i., p. 906. 


28 INTRODUCTION 


has been made out for its rejection; and I have given (in the 
notes in loc.) the reasons which seem to me to justify the Pauline 
authorship of the section, and plausibly to explain its insertion at 
this particular point. It is not impossible (though for the hypothesis 
there is no external authority) that the section is a marginal gloss 
which has crept into the text at a very early period, or a postscript 
written in the margin by St. Paul or his amanuensis. But, on the 
whole, I believe that it ought to be retained. 





CHAPTER III. 
THE HISTORY STYLE AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE. 


1. The external tradition as to the circulation and authority of 
the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is abundant from the year 
175 onward. It is quoted by Irenzus of Gaul repeatedly (e.g., Her., 
iii., 7, ‘‘aperte Paulum in secunda ad Corinthios dixisse,” etc.) ; by 
Athenagoras of Athens (de resurr. morte, xviii.) ; by Theophilus of 
Antioch (ad Autol., i., 12, iii, 14); by Tertullian of Carthage (de 
Pudicitia, 13 et passim); by Clement of Alexandria (frequently, 
e.g., Strom., iii., 14, iv., 6), witnesses representing Churches widely 
separated from each other. Again, the Epistle is mentioned in the 
Muratorian Fragment; it was in Marcion’s Canon, and there is no 
evidence that it was absent from any list of N.T. books or any 
collection of Pauline letters. Before 175 ap. the evidence is not 
copious, but it is distinct. The letter to Diognetus (v. 12) quotes 
chap. vi. 8-10; and the elders cited by Irenzeus, who represent (at 
latest) the generation preceding him, quote chap. xii. 4 (Her, V., v., 
1). Finally, Polycarp (ad Phil., ii., 4, and vi., 1) quotes chap. iv. 14 
and viii. 21, thus providing proof of the use of the Epistle before 
the year 120. That it seems to have been used by the Sethites and 
and Ophites would point to a similar conclusion,! 


11t is somewhat remarkable that the Epistle is not quoted by Clement of Rome 
when writing to the Church at Corinth. He cites (§ xlvii.) the First Epistle, and 
the Second, if known to him, would have supplied him with many apposite texts, 
powerfully supporting his appeal for unity. But no solid argument can be based 
on Clement’s silence, especially when it is remembered that we should look in vain 
in his letter for traces of Galatians, Colossians, Philippians, and 1 and 2 Thessa-: 


᾿ς lonians, as well as of 2 Corinthians. These letters may not have been known in 





Rome at the time; or Clement may have been personally unacquainted with 
them; or he may not have been familiar enough with their contents to quote 
from them. Any of these explanations is adequate, without resorting to the 

_ hypothesis (cf. Kennedy, 2 and 3 Corinthians, p. 142 ff.) that Clement does not 
quote the canonical 2 Corinthians because it was not yet in existence as a whole, 


but only survived in the form of fragments of the great Apostle’s correspondence 
with Corinth. 


30 INTRODUCTION 


2. External evidence is, however, of little importance in the case 
of a letter which so clearly betrays its authorship as 2 Corinthians 
does. It is unmistakably Pauline, in the tone and character of its 
teaching, no less than in its style and vocabulary. No Epistle lets 
us see more of the working of the Apostle’s mind, or gives us a 
clearer view of his personality (see above, chap. i., § 1). It is distinc- 
tively a letter rather than an ebistle ; that is, it was written to meet 
an emergency that had arisen at Corinth, and there is no trace that 
the writer was conscious that it would take a permanent place in 
literature. Herein lies at once its charm and its difficulty; and 
herein, too, is the explanation of the absence of systematic and con- 
sistent arrangement, such as might fairly be expected in a formal 
treatise. It reflects the varying moods of the writer; and the 
broken constructions and frequent anacolutha show that it was 
written at a time of mental agitation and excitement. 

3. We count it unnecessary to produce here the proofs of the 
Pauline character of the style and diction of the Epistle.’ They 
are apparent throughout, and the marginal references to the text 
have been specially prepared with a view of bringing out the linguistic 
parallels between 2 Corinthians and the other Pauline letters.? 
Among the words peculiar in the N.T. to this Epistle are the following: 
ἀβαρής, ἀγανάκτησις, dyrétys, ἀγρυπνία, ἁδρότης, ἄμετρος, ἀνακαλύπτειν, 
ἀνεκδιήγητος, ἀπαρασκεύαστος, ἀπειπεῖν, ἀπόκριμα, ἄρρητος, αὐγάζειν, αὐθαί- 
ρετος, βελίαρ, δίψος, δόλιος, δυσφημία, ἐγκρίνειν, ἐκδαπανᾶσθαι, ἐκδημεῖν, 
ἐκφοβεῖν, ἐλαφρία, ἐντυποῦν, ἐπενδύεσθαι, ἑτεροζυγεῖν, εὐφημία, ἱκανότης, 
καθαίρεσις, κάλυμμα, καπηλεύειν, καταβαρεῖν, κατάκρισις, καταναρκεῖν, 
κατάρτισις, κατοπτρίζεσθαι, μετοχή, μολυσμός, μωμεῖσθαι, νυχθήμερον, 
ὀχύρωμα, παραυτίκα, παραφρονεῖν, πεντάκις, πέρυσι, προαμαρτάνειν, προε- 
νάρχεσθαι, προκαταρτίζειν, προσαναπληροῦν, προσκοπή, πτωχεύειν, σαργάνη, 
σκῆνος, σκόλοψ, στενοχωρεῖσθαι, συγκατάθεσις, συλᾷν, συμπέμπειν, συμφώ- 
νησις, συναποστέλλειν, συνυπουργεῖν, συστατικός, ὑπερέκεινα, ὑπερεκτείνειν, 
ὑπερλίαν, φειδομένως, φωτισμός, ψευδαπόστολος, ψιθυρισμός. 

4. That the Epistle falls of itself into three parts is evident to 
the most casual reader. (1) From i. 1 to vii. 16 the writer is 


*Those who desire to learn what has been urged against the Pauline author- 
ship may be referred to Dr. Knowling’s Witness of the Epistles, chap. ii., ““ Recent 
Attacks upon the Hauptbriefe” ; see especially p, 192. But it is quite outside the 
plan of this commentary to take notice of every extravagance of criticism. (See 
also vol. ii., p. 753 above.) 

* Note that in the marginal references the LXX numbering of the Psalms and 
of the other O.T. books has been followed; and that “ here only” means that the 
word so designated does not occur again in the N.T. 








INTRODUCTION 1᾽) 


~ 


occupied with the reflections which are suggested by the report 
brought by Titus as to the response of the Corinthian Church to 
the injunctions of the First Epistle in the matter of the incestuous 
man. In this section there is a digression of great doctrinal import- 
ance on the Ministry of the New Covenant (iii. 7-iv. 15), followed 
by some profound thoughts about the life after death (iv. 16-v. 10) ; 
and a minor digression (vi. 14-vii. 1) about the dangers of inter- 
marriage with the heathen; but the main topic of these chapters 
is his thankfulness at the news he has received, which consoles 
him in his many troubles. Again and again he bids them be sure 
of his sincerity and single-mindedness. (2) Chapters viii. and ix. 
᾿ deal with the collection which was being made for the poor Chris- 
tians in Judza, a subject which had been much in his thoughts 
during the preceding year. (3) The last four chapters are taken 
up with a vindication of his apostolic authority, which was neces- 
sary to put forward plainly before his next visit to Corinth. There 
was a party in that city calling themselves by the name of Christ 
(x. 7), who made light of St. Paul’s apostolic claims and were 
trying to undermine his authority. The Church as a whole had 
acquiesced in St. Paul’s directions given in 1 Cor. v.; but a minority 
of malcontents were troublesome and calumnious, and needed re- 
pression. A detailed analysis of the letter is subjoined. 


ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE. 


I. The obedience of the Corinthians to the instructions of the First 
Epistle. 


Introductory— 
Address (i. 1, 2). 
God’s consolations and the sympathy of sorrow (i. 3-7). 
His recent peril (i. 8-11). 
His sincerity of purpose— 
They must acknowledge it (i. 12-14). 
His change of plan was not due to fickleness (i. 15-22). 
The real reason of the postponement of his visit (i. 23-ii. 4), 
The offender has been sufficiently punished (ii. 5-11). 
He rejoices to hear that his reproof has been loyally received (ii. 12-17). 
The Corinthians are his “ Letter of Commendation ” (iii. 1-3). 
His success, however, 1s due to God (iii. 4-6). 
Digression on the Ministry of the New Covenant— 
It is more glorious than that of the Old (iii. 7-11). 
It is more open (iii. 12-18). 
He, accordingly, delivers his message plainly (iv. 1-6). 


Il, 


ΠῚ, 


‘INTRODUCTION 


His bodily weakness does not annul the effects of his ministry (iv. 7-15). 
He is sustained by a glorious hope (iv. 16-18). 
His expectation of a glorified body hereafter, and his desire to 
survive until the Second Advent (v. 1-5). 
In any case to be with Christ is best (v. 6-8). 
We must remember the Judgment to come (v. 9, 10). 
He reiterates his sincerity of purpose (v. 11-13). 
The constraining power of his ministry (v. 14-16). 
In Christ all is new (v. 17-19). 
As Christ’s ambassador he prays them to be reconciled to God (vy. 
20-Vvi, 3). 
The conditions and characteristics of his ministry (vi. 4-10). 
He affectionately declares his sympathy and claims the same from them (vi, 
11-13). 
{Parenthetical warning against familiar association with the heathen (vi, 
14-vii, I).] 
He claims their sympathy again (vii. 2-4). 
He repeats his joy that his reproof has been loyally received (vii. 5-12). 
Titus also rejoiced to bring such tidings (vii. 13-16). 


The Collection for the Judzan Christians. 


The liberality of the Macedonian Churches (viii. 1-7). 
He counsels, though he will not command, the imitation of it (viii. 8-15). 
The mission of Titus and his two companions (viii. 16-24). 
Its purpose, that the collection may be made ready (ix. 1-5). 
Liberal giving is (a) blessed of God (ix. 6-11), and (δ) calls forth the bless- 
ings of the recipients (ix. 12-15). 


The Vindication of his Apostolic Authority. 


He entreats them not to force him to use his authority (x. 1-6). 
Despite all appearances it is weighty and is Divinely given him (x. 7-18). 
He begs them to bear with the statement of his claims at length (xi. 1-4). 
He is in no way inferior to his adversaries (xi. 5-15). 
His Apostolic labours and trials (xi. 16-33). 
His vision, of which he could boast, if he chose (xii. 1-6). 
His “ thorn in the flesh”’ (xii. 7-10). 
This testimony should have proceeded from the Corinthians (xii. 11-13). 
That he did not claim maintenance was disinterested (xii. 14-18). 
The purpose of this “ glorying ” is their edification (xii. 19-21). 
If he comes again, he will not spare (xiii. 1, 2). 
Christ is his strength: let them see to it that He is theirs also (xiii, 3-to), 
Conclusion— 
Final exhortations (xiii. 11). 
Salutations and benediction (xiii. 12, 13), 








CHAPTER IV. 


THE TEXT. 





1, The uncial manuscripts whose readings are cited, in all 
important cases, in the critical notes are the following :— 


8. Codex Sinaiticus (sec. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published 
in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862. 
The symbol ἐς is used to indicate the corrections intro- 
duced by a scribe of the seventh century, δ᾿" denoting the 
autograph of the original scribe. 


A. Codex Alexandrinus (szc. v.), at the British Museum, pub- 
lished in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson 
(1879); it is defective from chaps. iv. 13 to xii. 7 of our 
Epistle. 

B. Codex Vaticanus (sec. iv.), published in photographic fac- 
simile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi. 


C, Codex Ephraemi (szc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by 
Tischendorf in 1843. The text of our Epistle is wanting 
from chap. x. 8 to the end. 


Ὁ. Codex Claromontanus (szc. vi.), a Greco-Latin MS. at 
Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852. D> and De denote 
the readings introduced by correctors of the seventh and 
ninth centuries respectively. The Latin text is represented 
by d; it follows the Old Latin version with modifications. 


EB. Codex Sangermanensis (sec. ix.), a Greco-Latin MS., now 
at St. Petersburg, formerly belonging to the Abbey of 
Saint-Germain-des-Prés. Its text is largely dependent 
upon that of D. The Latin version, e (a corrected copy 
of d), has been printed, but with incomplete accuracy, by 
Belsheim (18 5). 

P. Codex Augiensis (szc. ix.),a Greco-Latin MS., at Trinity 
College, Cambridge, edited by Scrivener in 1859. Its Greek 


text is almost identical with that of G, and it is therefore 
VOL. III. 





34 INTRODUCTION 


not cited save where it differs from that MS. Its Latin 
version, f, presents the Vulgate text with some modifica- 
tions. 

G. Codex Boernerianus (sec. ix.), a Greeco-Latin MS., at Dres- 
den, edited by Matthzi in 1791. Written by an Irish 
scribe, it once formed part of the same volume as Codex 
Sangallensis (8) of the Gospels. The Latin text, g, is 
based on the O.L. translation. 

H. Codex Coislinianus (sec. vi.), fragments of which survive 
in several libraries. Of our Epistle chap. iv. 2-7 is at 
St. Petersburg, and chaps. x. 18-xi. 6 and xi. 12-xii, 2 
at Mount Athos. These latter fragments were edited by 
Duchesne in 1876; the readings of the former are given 
by Tischendorf. 

K. Codex Mosquensis (sec. ix.), edited by Matthzi in 1782. 


L. Codex Angelicus (sec. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf 
and others. 

M. Codex Ruber (szc. ix.), at the British Museum; it derives 
its name from the colour of the ink. It contains of this 
Epistle chaps. i. 1-15 and x. 13-xii. δ. 

O. This is a fragment (sec. vi.), at St. Petersburg, containing 

chaps. i. 20-ii, 12. 
Codex Porphyrianus (szc. ix.), at St. Petersburg, collated 
by Tischendorf. Its text is deficient for chap. ii. 13-16. 

R. Codex Cryptoferratensis (szc. vii.), a palimpsest fragment 
containing chap. xi. 9-19, edited by Cozza in 1867, and 
cited by Tischendorf.! 


ἐν; 


The tendency of these MSS. to fall into groups will be apparent 
on a cursory inspection of the apparatus criticus. The readings 
of DEG are, as a rule, “Western”; while $$B represent (as 
usual) a weight of authority that cannot be rejected without 
much hesitation. The lacune in A and C prevent the affinities 
of the “ Alexandrian” group SACLP from being as apparent here 
as in other Epistles (cf. Sanday-Headlam, Romans, p. Ixxi). 


? The following uncial authorities for our Epistle are as yet inedited :— 
S. At Mount Athos (szc. viii. ?), contains, inter alia, chaps. i. 1-xi. 23. 
¥. A ninth-century Codex at Mount Athos. It is said to be complete. 


“. Codex Patiriensis (sec. v.), at Rome (Vat. Gr. 2061). It contains chaps 
iv. 7-vi. 8 and vii. 15-x. 6 of our Epistle 








INTRODUCTION 35 


2. The minuscule or cursive manuscripts are very numerous, 
and only a few of special interest are occasionally cited in the 
critical apparatus. 17, the “queen of cursives” (sec. ix.), is at 
Paris ; 37 (sec. xv.) is the well-known Leicester Codex = Ev. 69; 
and 73 (szc. xi.) is at Upsala. 

3. Versions. Of these the Latin claims special attention. The 
versions d, e, f, g have been described above. We have also of the 
Old Latin the fragmentary Codex Frisingensis (r) of the sixth (?) 
century, containing of our Epistle chaps. i. 1-ii. 10, iii. 17-v. 1, 
vii. 10-viii. 12, ix. 10-xi. 21, xii. 14-21, xiii. 2-10. The symbol m 
marks the readings found in the Speculum, which represents the 
text of the Spaniard Priscillian. The Vulgate (vg) of the Pauline 
Epistles differs but little from the prae-Hieronymian Latin. 

In Syriac we have the Peshitto (sec. iii.?) and the Harclean 
version (szc. vii.). The margin of the latter often preserves better 
readings than are found in its text. 

Of Egyptian versions we have the Bohairic or the North Coptic, 
and the Sahidic or South Coptic, the language of Upper Egypt. 
These versions are to be dated probably about the third century. 

It has not come within the scope of this edition to cite the 
patristic authorities for the variants recorded; for a full conspectus 
the student must be referred to Tischendorfs Novum Testamentum 
Grace (8th edit.), on which the following apparatus criticus is based. 

4, In accordance with the general plan of the Expositor’s Greek 
Testament the “received text”’ (see vol. i., p. 52) is printed at the 
head of the pages but the commentary follows the reading, which 
has appeared to the editor to be, on the whole, most probably 
original. 

Among the Patristic Commentaries on the Epistle perhaps 
the most important are those of Chrysostom, Ambrosiaster and 
Primasius. Modern commentaries are very numerous. Stanley’s 
notes are often illuminating and picturesque; Alford is careful and 
thorough, as usual; and Waite (in the Speaker’s Commentary) 
provides a useful discussion of the main questions which the Epistle 
suggests. Of German commentaries Schmiedel’s (in the Hand 
Kommentar) is by far the most complete. It is a brilliant and 
scholarly piece of work, and is indispensable to the student who 
wishes to have detailed information as to the various schemes by 
which St. Paul’s history has been reconstructed for the years 53-55 
A.D. Schmiedel’s general view (see p. 19 above) that chaps. x.-xiii. con- 
stitute part of a letter distinct from and later than chaps. i.-ix. has 
not commended itself to the present editor; but his notes are full of 


36 INTRODUCTION 


learning and suggestiveness. Schnedermann’s edition of the Epistles 
to the Corinthians (in Strack-Zéckler’s Kommentar) has also been 
found useful at some points. Bengel’s Guomon and Field’s detached 
Notes have, of course, been diligently consulted.} 

In this edition the interpretation which has seemed on the whole 
the best has been set down, without (as a rule) discussing at length 
the rival theories. It would have been easy to crowd the notes 
with references to other editors; but it has seemed better to 
economise space in this direction, and so to find room for a larger 
number of references to St. Paul’s other writings. 


September, 1900, 


‘See also Prof. Findlay’s account of the Commentaries on 1 Coninizene 
vol. ii,, Ρ. 752 above). 








ΠΑΥΛΟΥ TOT ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΟΥ͂ 


H ΠΡΟΣ 


ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ 


ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΔΕΎΤΕΡΑ. 


I. 1. ΠΑΥΛΟΣ ἀπόστολος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ,, " διὰ " θελήματος "Θεοῦ, Rom. x. 


καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφὸς, τῇ "ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ " Θεοῦ τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορίνθῳ, 
Eph. i. 1; Col. i. 1; 4 Tim. i. 1. 


1; chap. 
viii. 5; 
Ὁ Acts xx. 28; 1 Cor. i. 4; σ᾿ Thess. ii. 14, etc. 


1 ADEGKL and most vss. have "Ino. Xp.; better Χριστον Ἴησου with BMP 17. 


CuaPpTer I, ADDRESS, vv. I, 2.—The 
usual form of address at the beginning of 
a Greek letter was A. B. χαίρειν (see 
Acts xxiii. 26); and this is adopted by 
St. James in his Epistle (Jas. i. 1), and is 
followed, among other Christian writers, 
by Ignatius in his letters (πλεῖστα χαίρειν 
is his ordinary formula). St. Paul, original 
in this as in all else, struck out a form for 
himself. He replaces χαίρειν by χάρις 
καὶ εἰρήνη (1 Thess.), which in subse- 
quent letters is expressed more fully, as 
here, χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς 
ἡμῶν καὶ Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. (In x 
and 2 Tim. he adds @\eos.) The simple 
greeting of ordinary courtesy is thus 

ed with a deep religious meaning. 
Grace is the keynote of the Gospel; and 
peace, the traditional and beautiful saluta- 
tion of the East, on Christian lips signifies 
not earthly peace merely, but the peace of 
God (Phil. iv. 7). The first instance of 
the combination of χάρις with εἰρήνη is 
noteworthy, viz., they are coupled in the 
Priestly Benediction at Num. vi. 24.— 
ἀπόστολος Xp. ᾽Ἴη.: St. Paul’s letters are 
all semi-official, except perhaps that to 
Philemon; and thus they usually begin 
with the assertion of his apostolic office. 
This it would be especially necessary to 
emphasise in a letter to Corinth, where 
his authority had been questioned quite 
recently (x. τὸ ff.), and where the names 


of Apollos and Peter had formerly been 
set in opposition to his (1 Cor. i. 12).— 
διὰ θελήματος Θεοῦ : he is ever anxious 
(see reff.) to explain that his apostleship 
was not assumed of himself; it is a mis- 
ston from God; he is a σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς.--- 
καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφός : Timothy now 
ΕΝ the place at St. Paul’s side which 
was filled by Sosthenes when 1 Cor. was 
written (1 Cor. i. 1), Timothy had been 
despatched to Macedonia (Acts xix. 22) 
to go on to Corinth (1 Cor. iv. 17), but 
St. Paul seems to have had a suspicion 
that he might be prevented from arriving 
there (1 Cor. xvi. 10). From the facts 
that we now find him in Macedonia, and 
that there is no mention of him in chap. 
xii. 16-18, it is likely that he was pre- 
vented from reaching Corinth by some 
causes of which we are unaware.—rq] 
ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ «.r.A.: the letter is 
addressed primarily to the Christian con- 
gregation at Corinth, and secondarily to 
the Christians throughout Achaia. It is 
thus a circular letter, like that to the 
Galatians or Ephesians, and so at the end 
we do not find salutations to individuals, 
as in τ Cor. and in the other letters 
addressed to particular Churches. The 
words τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορίνθῳ suggest the 
idea of settled establishment; the Church 
at Corinth had now been for some time 


in existence.—év ὅλῃ τῇ ᾿Αχαΐᾳ: the 


38 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY=2 B 


L 


ς Actsix. 13; σὸν τοῖς " ἁγίοις πᾶσι τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ᾿Αχαΐᾳ" 2. χάρις ὑμῖν 


1 Cor. xvi. 


τ ρα" καὶ 
ν 4, ix. 
τ; Phil 3. εὐλογητὸς ὁ * Θεὸς καὶ “ πατὴρ τοῦ 
d Ps. 
ixxxviii. 


εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Kai Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 


"Κυρίου ἡμῶν "Ἰησοῦ 


"Χριστοῦ, ὁ πατὴρ τῶν ‘ οἰκτιρμῶν καὶ " Θεὸς πάσης " παρακλήσεως, 


53: Lk i 4. ὁ "παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ ᾿θλίψει ἡμῶν, εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι 
i, 25, ix.5, ἡμᾶς παρακαλεῖν τοὺς ἐν πάσῃ θλίψει, διὰ τῆς παρακλήσεως ἧς 
ς, 


e Rom. xv. δ; Eph. i. 3; chap. xi. 31; 1 Pet. i 


5; Phil. ii. 1; 2 Thess. ii. τ6. b Isa. li. τα, Ixvi. 13. 


Roman province of Achaia included the 
whole country which we call Greece (ex- 
cluding Macedonia), and it is in this large 
sense that the name is used here (cf. ix. 
2 below). : 

Ver. 2. ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς κιτ.λ.: this 
coupling of the names of God our Father 
‘and the Lord $esus Christ as alike the 
source of grace and peace is most signi- 
ficant in its bearing upon St. Paul’s 
Christology (cf. xiii. 13). ; 

I. The Obedience of the Corin- 
thians to the Instructions of the 
First Epistle (i. 3—vii. 16). This is 
the main topic of the first section of this 
Epistle. Vv. 3-7: THANKSGIVING; GoD’s 
CONSOLATIONS AND THE SYMPATHY OF 
Sorrow. St. Paul’s habit is to begin 
his letters with an expression of thank- 
fulness for the Christian progress of his 
correspondents. The only exceptions 
are the Epp. to Titus and to the Gala- 
tians (in this case he had received bad 
news from Galatia). In 1 Tim. i. 12 the 
cause of his thankfulness is the exhibition 
of the Divine mercy to himself; and this 
Epistle begins with a like thought, from 
which he passes (ver. 14) to his confident 
belief that the Corinthian Christians are 
still his καύχημα. It was especially im- 
portant that a letter which was so largely 
taken up with rebuke and with the asser- 
tion of his apostolical authority should 
begin with a message of sympathy and 
hopefulness (vv. 11 ff. 

Ver. 3. εὐλογητὸς ὁ Θεὸς x.7.d.: blessed 
is the God and Father of our Lord Fesus 
Christ. Note that rot Κυρίου is depen- 
dent on Θεός as well as on πατήρ; cf. 
Eph. i. 17, and John xx. 17, Rev. i. 6. 
This ts the starting-point of the Christian 
revelation, that the Supreme is ‘the 
God and Father” of Jesus Christ; He 


is εὐλογητός (FIND), the Object of 


His creatures’ blessing. The verb is not 
expressed, but the analogy of 1 Pet. iv. 
11 would indicate that ἐστίν rather than 
ἔστω should be understood. A doxology 
is not a prayer, but (cf. Matt. vi. 13, and 


f Isa. lxiii, 15, 16; Rom. xii. 1. g Rom. xv. 
i Ver. 8; chaps. ii. 4, iv. 17, vi. 4, viii. 2, 13. 


John xii. 13, a close parallel) a thankful 
and adoring statement of the Divine 
goodness and power.—6 πατὴρ τῶν 
οἰκτιρμῶν: the Father of mercies, 56.» 
from whom merciful acts proceed; oix- 
τιρμός, compassion, is the very charac- 
teristic of a Father’s providence; see 
reff. and Luke vi. 36.---καὶ Θεὸς πάσης 
παρακλήσεως: and God of all comfort, 
sc., from whom every consolation pro- 
ceeds. We have παράκλησις applied to 
God in O.T., ¢.g., in Ps. xciii. 19, at 
παρακλήσεις cou ἠγάπησαν τὴν ψυχήν 
μου; and the word is adopted in the 
N.T. for the Divine comfort not only 
St. Paul (see reff.), but by St. Luke (it. 
25 and Acts ix. 31), and by St. John, who 
describes alike the Spirit (John xiv. 16, 
xv. 26, xvi. 7) and the Son (1: John ii. 1) 
as the παράκλητος. 

Ver. 4. ὁ παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς κ.οτιλ.: 
who comforteth us in all our affliction 
(the def. art. indicating trials actually 
existing). The verb παρακαλεῖν has 
three shades of meaning, (a) to beseech, 
eighteen times in St. Paul, (δ) to exhort, 
seventeen times, (c) to comfort, thirteen 
times, of which seven are in this Epistle, 
where the word occurs altogether seven- 
teen times. Cf. ver. 6, ii. 7, 8, v. 20, vi. 
I, vii. 6, 7, 13, Viii. 6, ix. 5, x. 1, xii. 8, 
18, xiii. 11.—els τὸ δύνασθαι «.7.X.: to 
the end that we may be able to comfort 
them that are in any affliction (sc., any 
that may happen to arise). This is the 
final purpose of God’s gifts of grace, viz., 
that they may not only be a blessing to 
the individual, but through him and as 
reflected from him to his fellows.—is 
παρακαλούμεθα: through the comfort 
wherewith we ourselves are being com- 
forted of God. ἧς, for ἥν, has been at- 
tracted into the case of παρακλήσεως (cf. 
1 Cor. vi. 19, chap. x. 13, Eph. ii. το). 

Ver. 5. ὅτι καθὼς περισσεύει κ.τ.λ.: 
for as Christ’s sufferings flow over abun- 
dantly to us, even so our comfort also 
aboundeth through Christ. hat the 
Christian is a fellow-sufferer with Christ 
is frequently urged by St. Paul (Rom. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 39 


παρακαλούμεθα αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ 5. ὅτι καθὼς περισσεύει τὰ * Cf Chap. 


2-——7. 


παθήματα ' τοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς, οὕτω διὰ Χριστοῦ 5 περισσεύει Eph iii 
καὶ ἡ παράκλησις ἡμῶν. 6. εἴτε δὲ "θλιβόμεθα, "ὑπὲρ τῆς ὑμῶν. Chaps. LF 


παρακλήσεως καὶ σωτηρίας, τῆς ἐνεργουμένης ἐν ᾿ὑπομονῇ τῶν 4x1 ms 
αὐτῶν παθημάτων ὧν καὶ ἡμεῖς πάσχομεν - εἴτε παρακαλούμεθα, ὑπὲρ Lage id 

τῆς ὑμῶν παρακλήσεως καὶ cwrynptiast: 7. καὶ ἡ ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν ™BeBata n ΡΝ 
ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν - εἰδότες ὅτι ὥσπερ ὅ " κοινωνοί ἐστε τῶν παθημάτων, οὕτω ἘΣ 


1 DE have ro παθημα. 

* The uncials have του Χριστον; tov is omitted by a few minuscules only. 

3 B 17 omit the first και σωτηριας. 

* The order of clauses in the latter part of the verse is variously given in the MSS. 
The received text (followed by the A.V.) is devoid of MS. authority and was manu- 
factured by Erasmus. The choice lies between (1) eure παρακαλουμεθα ὑπερ τῆς 
πυημων παρακλήσεως (omitting kat σωτηριας) τῆς evepyouperns εν ὑυπομονῃ των αυτων 
παθηματων wy και ἡμεις πάσχομεν και ἡ ελπις . . - vpwv, which is attested by 
SACMP, 1, the Peshitto and Bohairic vss.; and (2) της evepyoupevns εν ὑυπομονῃ 





τῶν AUTWY TT 
ειτε 
οἵ BDEGKL, d, e, f, g, and 
Tisch., W.H. and the R.V. 


αθηματων wy Kat ἡμεις πασχομεν, και ἡ cAmis ἡμων βεβαια υπερ υμων- 
ακαλουμεθα, ὑπερ τῆς υμων παρακλησεως και σωτηριας, Which is the order 
e Harclean. 


We follow (1), which is adopted by 


δ For womep (DbcKL, etc.) read ws, with NABCD*E*MP, etc. 


viii. 17, Phil. iii, 10, Col. i. 24; see esp. 
chap, iv. 10, 11 below, and cf. Matt. xx. 
22). Here he dwells on the thought that 
this fellowship in suffering implies also 
the consolation and strength which flow 
from union with Christ; cf. 1 Pet. iv. 13. 

Vv. 6, 7. We follow the reading of 
the Revisers (see crit. note) and trans- 
late: But whether we be afflicted, it is 
for your comfort and salvation; or 
whether we be comforted, it is for your 
comfort, which worketh in the patient 
endurance of the same things which we 
also suffer : and our hope for you is stead- 
fast; knowing that as ye are partakers 
of the sufferings, so also are ye of the 
comfort. This is an expansion of the 
εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι κιτιλ. Of ver. 4: the 


Apostle’s afflictions and consolations’ 


alike are for the sake of his converts; 
they and he have a common fellowship. 
in Christ, with all which that involves of 
sympathy with each other. The nearest 
parallel (see reff.) is Eph. iii. 13, διὸ 
αἰτοῦμαι μὴ ἐνκακεῖν ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσίν 

υ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, ἥτις ἐστὶν δόξα ἫΝ 3 

or the constr. εἴτε . . . εἴτε cf. chap. 
v. 13 and 1 Cor. xii. 26. Note that 
ἐνεργεῖσθαι is always in the N.T. middle, 
not passive, and is used intransitively 
(see Rom. vii. 5, chap. iv. 12, Gal. v. 6, 
Eph. iii. 20, Col. i. 29, 1 Thess. ii. 13); 
when the verb is used of God it is always 
in the active voice (1 Cor. xii. 6, Gal. ii. 


8, etc.).—év ὑπομονῇ: ὑπομονή means 
expectation or hopeful waiting in the 
canonical books of the LXX; but is 
often used for steadfast endurance in 
Ecclus, and in 4 Macc. (see 4 Macc. xvii. 
12). It is a favourite word with St. Paul 
in this latter sense, in which it is always 
used in the N.T. (cf., ¢.g., Luke xxi. 19, 
1 Tim. vi. 11); for the juxtaposition of 
ὑπομονή and παράκλησις see Rom. xv. 
5.--τῶν αὐτῶν παθημάτων: the suffer- 
ings which the Corinthian brethren must 
endure are here represented as the same 
as those of the Apostle; i.e., the reference 
is not to any special affliction such as 
that alluded to in ver. 8, but to the 
troubles which came upon him in the 
general discharge of his Apostolic office 
and upon all those who were engaged in 
the struggle against Judaism on the one 
side and heathendom on the other. 

Ver. 7. καὶ ἡ ἐλπὶς «.1.A.: and our 
hope for you is steadfast, knowing (we 
should expect εἰδότων, but cf. Rom. xiii. 
11) that as ye are partakers of the suffer- 
ings (see reff. for κοινωνός with a gen, 
objecti), so also are ye of the comfort. The 
main idea of this section is well given by 
Bengel: ‘“*Communio sanctorum ... 
egregie representatur in hac epistola”. 

Vv. 8-11. His Recent Perit. Ver. 
8. ot yap θέλομεν «.7.A.: for we would 
not have you ignorant, brethren, about 
(for ὑπέρ with gen. in this sense, cf, 


40 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B ae 


o Acts xix. καὶ τῆς παρακλήσεως. 8. οὐ γὰρ θέλομεν ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοὶ, 


᾿δπὲρ 1 τῆς θλίψεως ἡμῶν τῆς γενομένης ἡμῖν " ἐν τῇ “᾿Ασίᾳ, ὅτι καθ᾽, 


135 Cer. » ὑπερβολὴν * ἐβαρήθημεν ὃ ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, ὥστε * ἐξαπορηθῆναι ἡμᾶς 


δδαρν, Θεῷ τῷ 
ΝΎ Ρ y. Oe τῷ 


7; Gali ἐσχήκαμεν, ἵνα μὴ ᾿ πεποιθότες ὦμεν ‘eq’ *éautois, GAN’ “ ἐπὶ τῷ 
" ἐγείροντι 4 τοὺς νεκρούς - 10. ὃς ἐκ τηλικούτου θανάτου 


vie ἐρρύσατο ἡμᾶς καὶ ῥύεται," " εἰς ὃν "ἠλπίκαμεν ὅτι ὁ καὶ ἔτι Ἷ 
: a sHereonly. t Lk. xviii.g., ἃ ΡΒ. ii. 12; Jer. xvii. 7. v Chap. iv. 14; Rom. viii 
11; 1 Cor. vi. 14, etc. w Rom. vii. 24; Col. i 13; 1 Thess. i, 10. x John v. 45; 1 Pet. iii. 5 


1 BKLM have ὑπερ τῆς OX., probably the autograph; but περι (a natural altera- 


tion) has the support of SACDEGP 17. 


2 \ecDbcEKL, the Syriac and Bohairic give ἡμῖν; om. ἡμῖν S*ABCD*GMP 17 


and the Latins. 


3 DEGKL, d, e, f, g, vg. and the Syriac vss. give «Bap. υπερ 
δυναμιν εἐβαρηθημεν, with RABCMP 17, r 


*G has emt Ocov Tov eytpovra. 


Suv. ; better vwep 


5 DcEGKLM, f, vg. and the Harclean give pverar; ρυσεται has the stronger 


support of Ὁ ΒΟΡ 17, g, and the Bohairic. 


6 ort is omitted in BD*M; G, g insert it after και; all other authorities support 


received text. 
7 DbG and a few cursives omit ert. 


chap. viii. 23, xii. 8, 2 Thess. ii. 1) our 
affliction which happened in Asia, that 
we were weighed down exceedingly, 
beyond our power, insomuch that we 
despaired even of life. Having spoken 
in general terms of the Divine comfort in 
times of trouble, he goes on to mention 
his own particular case, the ‘affliction 
which befel him in Asia”. What was 
this? Asia almost certainly means 
Ephesus, where he had lately been exposed 
to many adversaries (x Cor. xv. 32, xvi. 9). 
We naturally think of the tumult recorded 
in Acts xix. 23 ff.; but the language here 
used is so strong that he must have been 
exposed to something worse than a tem- 
riot. He was ‘‘weighed down 
beyond his power” (ὑπὲρ δύναμιν, a 
phrase which he never uses elsewhere, 
and which is specially remarkable from 
the pen of one who always gloried in the 
Divine δύναμις granted to him, of which 
he said πάντα ἰσχύω ἐν τῷ ἐνδυνα- 
μοῦντί με, Phil. iv. 13); he ““ despaired of 
life,” and yet he describes in this very 
Epistle (iv. 8) his general attitude in tri- 
bulation as “ perplexed, yet not despair- 
ing”. Nor have we knowledge of any 
secution at Ephesus so violent as to 
justify such language, though no doubt 
the allusion may be to something of the 
kind, Whatever the “affliction” was, 
the Corinthians were acquainted with it, 
for St. Paul does not enter into details, 


but mentions it only to inform them of its 
gravity, and toassure them of his trust in 
his ultimate deliverance. On the whole, 
it seems most likely that the reference is 


to grievous bodily sickness, which brought 


the Apostle down to the gates of death 
(see ver. 9, and cf. chap. iv. 10 and xii. 
7 ff.). Such an affliction would be truly 
ὑπὲρ δύναμιν ; and it would be necessary 
to contemplate its recurrence (ver. το). 
St. Paul in this Epistle, with unusual 
frequency, uses the plural ἡμεῖς when 
speaking of himself; sometimes this can 
be explained by the fact that Timothy was 
associated with him in the writing of the 
letter (i. 1), but in other passages (e.g., 
ver. I0, v. 13, 16, x. 7, II, 15, xi. 21) such 
an explanation will not suit the context, 
which demands the individual application 
of the pronoun. 

Ver. 9. ἀλλὰ αὐτοὶ K.T.A.: nay, we 
ourselves had the sentence of death in our- 
selves; 1.6., the danger was so great that 
the sentence of death had been already 
pronounced, as it were. ἀπόκριμα might 
mean ‘‘answer,’’ as the Revisers trans- 
late it (they give sentence, with the A.V., 
in their margin); cf. the verb ἀποκρίνειν- 
But in the other places where this rare 
word is found (e.g., Jos., Ant., xiv. το, 
6, and an inscription of 51 A.D., quoted 
by Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 
85) it stands for an official decision or 
sentence, Cf. κρίμα θανάτου, “the sen- 





I 





8—12. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B 41 


4 ῥύσεται, 11. "συνυπουργούντων καὶ ὑμῶν 1 ὑπὲρ 5 ἡμῶν ® τῇ δεήσει, te oui 
ἵνα ἐκ πολλῶν "προσώπων τὸ εἰς ἡμᾶς χάρισμα διὰ πολλῶν 2 Here only. 


" εὐχαριστηθῇ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν." 


a Prov. viii. 
oandreff. 
low. 


12. Ἢ γὰρ "καύχησις ἡμῶν αὕτη ἐστὶ, τὸ μαρτύριον τῆς “συνειδή- > Chaps. iv. 


15, ix. 12. 


σεως ἡμῶν, ὅτι ἐν ἁπλότητι ὁ καὶ " εἰλικρινείᾳ Θεοῦ,7 οὐκ ὃ ἐν σοφίᾳ ¢ τ Cor. xv. 


σαρκικῇ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν χάριτι Θεοῦ * ἀνεστράφημεν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ, περισσο- 


d Eccl. x. 20; Wisd. xvii. 11 only in LXX; οἵ. Rom. ἰδ. rg. 
f Ezek, xix. 6; Eph. ii. 3; 1 Tim. iii. 15. 


10, 17. 
only; οἵ. Phil. i. το. 


1A has ἡμῶν for υμων- 
5. AG have υμων for ἡμῶων- 


31; chaps. 
vii. 4, 14, 

Viii. 24, xi. 
e1 Cor. v. 8; chap. ii. 17 


3 D*G have περι for ὑπερ. 
4 GM, d, e, g, give ev πολλῳ προσωπῳ. 


5 evy. ὑπερ ἡμῶν is read by SACD*GM 17 nd the vss.; BDcEFKLP have vpev, 


6 ἀπλοτητι NCDEGL, the Latin and Syriac vss.; but the better supported reading 
is αγιοτητι of S*ABCKMP 17, 37, 73, and the Bohairic (see note). 


7 S8ABCDEM have του Θεου; GKLP omit του. 
8 BM 37, 73, £, vg. and the Harclean read και ovx ev; W.H. place και in brackets. 


tence of death” (Ecclus, xli. 3). The 
tense of ἐσχήκαμεν is noteworthy; it 
seems to be a kind of historical perfect, 
used like an aorist (cf. chap. ii. 13, xi. 25, 
Rev. v. 7, viii. 5, fora similar usage).— 
ἵνα μὴ πεποιθότες x.7.A.: i.¢., “the 
gravity of the danger was such as to im- 
press upon me the vanity of putting my 
trust anywhere save in God, who has the 
power of life and death”. God can 
“raise the dead” (see chap. iv. 14); 
much more can He bring the dying 
from the gates of death. 

Ver. 10. ὅς ἐκ τηλικ. κιτιλ.: who 
delivered us out of so great a death, and 
will deliver (reading ῥύσεται). The form 
of words recalls Rom. xv. 31 and 2 Tim. 
iv. 17, 18, which would give some sup- 
port to the theory that the great peril in 
question was persecution at the hands of 
opponents ; but (as we have said on ver. 
8) it seems more probable that the 
Apostle’s deliverance was from a danger- 
ous illness. It is possible, indeed, that 
we have here a reminiscence of Job 
Xxxiii. 30, ἐρύσατο τὴν ψυχήν pov ἐκ 
θανάτου, which would confirm this inter- 
pretation. Note that the preposition is 


ἐκ, not ἀπό; ἀπό would only indicate 


deliverance from the neighbourhood of 
a danger; ἐκ indicates emergence froma 
danger to which one has actually been 
exposed (see Chase, Lord’s Prayer in the 
Early Church, pp. 71 ff.). Cf. with the 
whole phrase 2 Tim. iv. 17, 18, ἐρύσθην 
ἐκ στόματος λέοντος, ῥύσεταί pe ὁ κύριος 
k.T-A.—els ὃν ἠλπίκαμεν : towards whom 
we have set our hope. εἰς with the acc. 
(see reff.) expresses the direction towards 
which hope looks; ἐπί with the dat. after 


ἐλπίζειν (τ Tim. iv. 10, vi. 17) rather indi- 
cates that in which hope rests. Cf. Ps. 
iv. 6, ἐλπίσατε ἐπὶ κύριον. The perfect 
ἠλπίκαμεν here has its full force, viz., 
“towards whom we have set our hope, 
and continue to do so”; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 
19, 1 Tim. v. 5, vi. 17.—Kal ἔτι ῥύσεται: 
the force of ἔτι (if indeed it be part of 
the true text: see crit. note) is to carry 
the mind on to the perils of the future, as 
distinguished from those of the present : 
He will continue to deliver us. 
Ver. 11. συνυπουργούντων καὶ ὑμῶν 
κιτιλ.: 2” also helping together on our 
behalf by your supplication ; 1.e., appar- 
ently, “helping me”. St. Paul claims 
that the sympathy of his converts with 
him shall be exhibited by their prayers 
forhim. δέησιφ is prayer for a particular 
object, as contrasted with the more general 
προσευχή (Eph. vi. 18).—tva ἐκ πολλῶν 
προσώπων K.t.A.: that from many faces 
(sc., as if upturned in thanksgiving) thanks 
be given on our behalf through many for 
the gift bestowed on us. πρόσωπον came 
to mean “person” in later Greek, but it 
never can be thus translated in the N.T., 
save in the phrase λαμβάνειν πρόσωπον 
(Luke xx. 21, Gal. ii. 6) or θαυμάζειν 
πρόσωπα (Jude 16), “to respect the per- 
son’? of anyone. Even in these passages 
λαμβάνειν πρόσωπον is aHebraism which 
originally meant “raise the face’’ (see 
Plummer on Luke xx. 21). πρόσωπον 
is used ten times elsewhere in this Epistle 
in its ordinary sense of ‘ face”’ (chap. ii. 
10, iii. 7, 13, 18, iv. 6, v. 12, Vili. 24, X. 
I, 7, xi. 20; cf. also 1 Cor. xiii. 12, xiv. 
25, Gal. i. 22). Hence we cannot follow 
the English versions in translating ἐκ 


42 


g1 Cor. xiii. PF 

a iv ap, τέρως δὲ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 
xvi. 18; 
chaps. vi. 


τ 1 BG om. αλλ᾽, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B ra 


13. οὐ γὰρ ἄλλα γράφομεν ὑμῖν ἀλλ᾽} ἢ 3 ἃ 
ἀναγινώσκετε, ἢ ὃ καὶ " ἐπιγινώσκετε, ἐλπίζω δὲ ὅτι καὶ ὁ ἕως τέλους 


7A om. ἢ α. 


5 B and a few cursives omit q καὶ ewtyvwoxere (through homceoteleuton); GK, 
the Latin, Peshitto and Bohairic vss. omit y. 


* SSABCD*EG and most vss. omit kat; ins. DCKLMP and the Harclean. 


πολλῶν προσώπων “ by many Petras x 
in this verse, an additional difficulty in 
the way of such a rendering being that 
it would require ὑπό, not ἐκ. πρόσωπον 
is a ὕες and the image in the writer’s 
mind is that of faces upturned in prayer, 
the early Christian (and the Jewish) atti- 
tude of prayer being one of standing with 
uplifted eyes and outstretched arms (cf. 
Ps. xxvii. 2, Matt. vi. 5, 1 Tim. ii. 8, and 
Clem. Rom.,§ 29). The general thought, 
of the united thanksgivings of many 
persons, is found twice again in the 
Epistle in somewhat similar contexts rin 
τε). χάρισμα and εὐχαριστεῖν (the 
passive is found here only in N.T.) are 
favourite words with St. Paul, the former 
occurring sixteen times in his Epistles 
and only once elsewhere in the N.T. 
(x Pet. iv. ro). 

Vv. 12-14. THEY MUST ACKNOWLEDGE 
HIS SINCERITY OF PURPOSE. 
that he has always been frank and open 
in his dealings with the Corinthian Chris- 
tians: cf. 1 Thess. ii. 3.— yap καύχησις 
x.t.A.: for our glorying is this. Note 
καύχησις, not καύχημα, as at ver. 14, 
which is rather the thing boasted of 
than the act of boasting. καυχάομαι and 
its cognates are peculiarly frequent in 
this Epistle (see Introd., p. 27).---τὸ pap- 
τύριον τῆς συνειδήσεως ἡμῶν: viz., the 
testimony of Our conscience. μαρτύριον 
is the thing testified to by conscience, as 
contrasted with μαρτυρία, the act of 
testimony. συνείδησις, ‘ conscientia,” 
represents the self sitting in judgment 
on self, a specially Greek idea, and taken 
over by St. Paul from Greek thought; 
the word is a favourite one with him, both 
in his Epistles and in his speeches (Acts 
xxiii, I, xxiv. 16).---ὅτι ἐν ἁγιότητι κα 
εἰλικρινείᾳ Θεοῦ : that in holiness and 
sincerity of God (cf. chap. iv. 2). The 
received reading, ἁπλότητι, probably 
arose from the fact that while eatpet 
occurs four times in this Epistle, and is a 
specially Pauline word, ἁγιότης is rare, 
only occurring in the Greek Bible twice 
elsewhere (2 Macc. xv. 2, Heb. xii. 10), 
The etymology of εἰλικρινεία (see reff.) 


He claims | 


is uncertain; but the meaning is not 
doubtful. The force of the genitive τοῦ 
Θεοῦ is somewhat the same as in the 
phrase δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ (Rom. iii. 21) ; 
the holiness and sincerity which St. Paul 
claims as characterising his conduct are 
Divine qualities, and in so far as they are 
displayed in men they are God’s gift, as 
he goes on to explain.—oix ἐν σοφίᾳ 
σαρκικῇ K.T.A.: not in fleshly wisdom, 
but in God’s grace, sc., which had been 
vouchsafed to him for the due discharge 
of his apostolic office (Rom. i. 5, xii. 
3, xv. 15, x Cor. iii. 10, Eph. iii. 2). 
Especially in the Corinthian letters does 
St. Paul insist on this, that his power is 
not that of human wisdom (x Cor. ii. 4, 
13, chap. x. 4). The word σαρκικός is 
found five times in his letters, and only 
twice elsewhere in N.T. It signifies that 
which belongs to the nature of the σάρξ 
of man, as contrasted with odpxwos, 
“made of flesh,’’ which is the stronger 
word (cf. iii. 3 below).—avertpadnpev ἐν 
τῷ κόσμῳ: did we behave ourselves in the 
world, sc., the heathen world (cf. 1 Cor. 
v. 10, Phil. ii. 15).--περισσοτέρως 
πρὸς ὑμᾶς: and more abundantly to you- 
ward, sc., perhaps because his oppor- 
tunities at Corinth had been greater than 
elsewhere of displaying the holiness and 
sincerity of the Christian life. 

Ver. 13. οὐ yap ἄλλα K.t.A.: for we 
write none other things unto you than 
what ye read (ἀναγινώσκειν always means 
‘*toread’’ in St. Paul’s Epp. and through- 
out the N.T.) or even acknowledge; 1.¢., 
there is no hidden meaning in his letters ; 
he means what he says, as to which 
doubts seem to have been prevalent at 
Corinth (chap. x. 10,11). The play upon 
words ἀναγινώσκετε . . « ἐπιγινώσκετε 
cannot be reproduced in English. St. 
Paul is fond of such paronomasia; see, 
6.254 γινωσκομένη .. . ἀναγινωσκομένη, 
chap. iii. 2; φρονεῖν, ὑπερφρονεῖν, σω- 
φρονεῖν, Rom. xii. 3 ; συνκρίνω, ἀνακρίνω, 
t Cor. ii. 13, 14; ἐργαζόμενοι . . . 
περιεργαζόμενοι, 2 Thess. iii. rx; οὔ, for 
other illustrations 1 Cor. vii. 31, xi. 31, 
xii, 2, Phil. iii, 2, Eph. v. 15, and chaps 





13—16. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 43 


ἐπιγνώσεσθε, 14. καθὼς καὶ ἐπέγνωτε ἡμᾶς " ἀπὸ ἢ" μέρους, Sri 105. xviii 


20; Rom. 


‘kavxnpa ὑμῶν ἐσμεν, καθάπερ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἡμῶν, ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ 4 25, χν. 


Κυρίου ! Ἰησοῦ.3 


24; 
y 


bs ᾽ 2 
15. καὶ ταύτῃ τῇ " πεποιθήσει ἐβουλόμην πρὸς * chap if. 5 


s 


ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν πρότερον," ἵνα δευτέραν χάριν" ἔχητε, τό. καὶ Lf) 1 Cape. x 
ὑμῶν διελθεῖν εἰς Μακεδονίαν, καὶ πάλιν ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας ἐλθεῖν Sie τ 


x. 2; Eph. iii, 12; Phil. iii. 4 only. 


1 Num. xx. 18; Rom. xv. 28. 


1 του κυριου ἡμῶν is read by NBGMP, f, g, vg., the Bohairic and Peshitto. pov 
is (wrongly) omitted by ACDEKL, d, e and most cursives. 


3 D*EGMP and nearly all vss. add Xpicrov after Ἰησου; om. N*ABCDbcKL 


(tightly). 


83 DEGKL and most vss. have ελθειν προς υμας ; but NABCMP and the Harclean 


support the received order. 


4 προτερον should come after εβουλομην, with nearly all the uncials; the received 
text follows the order of KL and the Bohairic. 


5 We retain χαριν, which is found in §$*ACDEGK; but NcBLP have xapayv, 
which is adopted by W.H., and is mentioned in R.V. margin. 


δ exynre ADEGKL; better σχήτε with S$BCP (see on ii. 3). 
7 AD*GP have απελθειν ; διελθεῖν SBCDcEKL. 


iv. 8, x. 12 below. ἀλλ᾽ ἤ is equivalent 
to “except”; cf. Job vi. 5, Isa. xlii. 19. 
--ἐλπίζω δὲ ὅτι «.7.A.: and I hope that 


ye will acknowledge unto the end, sc., 


unto the day of the Lord’s appearing (as 
in τ Cor. i. 8), when the secrets of all 
hearts shall be revealed. 

Ver. 14. καθὼς καὶ ἐπέγνωτε κ.τ.λ.: 
as also ye did acknowledge us in part; 
i.¢., some of them made this acknowledg- 
ment, but not all (1 Cor. τὶ ἌΣ 
καύχημα ὑμῶν ἐσμεν: that (not ‘ be- 
cause hy oeuvre κὰν glorying (cf. ν. 12); 
that is, the Corinthian Church was 
proud of its connexion with the great 
Apostle, and still “gloried” in him.— 
καθάπερ καὶ ὑμεῖς ἡμῶν κ.τιλ.: as ye 
also are ours, in the day of our Lord 
Fesus. Lest this assertion of his single- 
mindedness and integrity should seem to 
claim any undue superiority to his fellow 
Christians at Corinth, he hastens to add, 
parenthetically, with remarkable tact, 
that if he is their “ glory’? so are they 
his. He constantly thinks thus of his 
converts; cf., @g., Phil. ii, 16 and σ᾿ 
Thess. ii. 19, 20.—év τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου 
Ἰησοῦ: “Α day of the Lord,” ‘The 
Day of the Lord” are common ex- 
pressions in the prophets; cf. Isa. xiii. 
6, οἱ Jer. xlvi. 10, Ezek. xxx. 3, Zech. 
xiv. 1, Joeli. 15, ii. 1, 11, 31 (cited Acts 
ii. 20), etc. And the phrase is taken up 
by St. Paul (x Thess. v. 2, 1 Cor. i. 8, v. 
5; cf. Phil. i. το, 2 Tim. i. 12), and is 
applied to the Second Advent of Christ; 
cf. also 2 Pet. iii, το, and Matt. xxiv. 42. 


Vv. 15-22. His CHANGE oF PLAN WAS 
not DuE To FICKLENESS. καὶ ταύτῃ τῇ 
πεποιθήσει ἐβουλόμην tA. : and in this 
confidence (sc., that they would acknow- 
ledge his sincerity) I was minded to come 
before (sc., before he went to Macedonia) 
unto you, that ye might have a second 
benefit. The circumstances seem to have 
been as follows. While St. Paul was at 
Ephesus (Acts xix.) his intention had 
been to cross the AZgean to Corinth, 
thence to visit Macedonia, and then to 
come back to Corinth on his way to 
Judza with the contributions which he 
had gathered (cf. 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 4). The 
Corinthians would thus have enjoyed a 
“second benefit” (cf. Rom. i. 11, xv. 29), 
inasmuch as he would have visited them 
both on his way to Macedonia, and on 
his return journey. This project he had 
communicated to them, probably in the 
letter which is lost (x Cor. v. 9). But he 
received bad news from Corinth (1 Cor. 
i. 11), and he wrote 1 Cor. in reply. In 
this letter (x Cor. xvi. 5) he incidentally 
mentioned that he had changed his plans, 
and that he now proposed to travel from 
Ephesus to Corinth vid Macedonia, the 
route which he adopted in the sequel 
(Acts xx. 1 ff., chap. il. 12, vii. 5). When 
the Corinthians heard of this, they began 
to reproach him with fickleness of pur- 
pose (chap. i. 17), and the charge came 
to his ears. We have his defence in the 
verses (15-22) before us. 

Ver. 16. προπεμφθῆναι: ‘to be set 
forward on my journey”. The practice 


44 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 1. 


mActsx¥.% πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν ἢ προπεμφθῆναι εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν. 17. 


xx. 38, xx 


~ 


5; om. τοῦτο οὖν Boudeudpevos! μή τι dpa τῇ " ἐλαφρίᾳ ἐχρησάμην ; ἢ ἃ 
Cor. xvi. 9 βουλεύομαι, " κατὰ " σάρκα βουλεύομαι, ἵνα q παρ᾽ ἐμοὶ τὸ “ ναὶ 


6, 11; Tit. 
iii. 13. 
n Here only; 


lv. 


7 a 2 4 ᾿ . 
cf ag ὑμᾶς οὖκ ἐγένετο “ vat Kat o 


ναὶ καὶ τὸ οὗ οὗ; 18. πιστὸς δὲ ὁ Θεὸς, ὅτι ὁ λόγος ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς 


19. 6 γὰρ τοῦ Θεοῦ υἱὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς 


o Here only Χριστὸς * ὁ ἐν ὑμῖν δι᾿ ἡμῶν " κηρυχθεὶς, δι᾿ ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ 


in Paul, 


p John viii. 15; Rom. viii. 4, 12, 13; chaps. v. 16, x. 5, xi. 18. 
iii, 16. 


q Mt. v. 37; Jas. v. 12. rx Tim. 


1 The better reading is BovAopevos, with NABCGP, f, vg. and the Bohairic; 


BovAevopevos DEK, d, e, g and the Syriac. 


3 eyevero of $cDbcEKL is probably a (mistaken) correction of ἐστιν, which is read 
by )*ABCD*GP 17, the Latin and the Bohairic vss. 


5, S$ABCP, 17 have o του Θεου yap; text follows the later authorities DEGKL. 


4 Ἴη. Xp. has the support of SCBDEGKLP; but S{*AC (a strong combination) 
give Χρ. Ἰη. The order of words is therefore doubtful, but we prefer Xp. Ἴη. on the 


whole. 


of speeding fellow-Christians on their 
journeys, of “ seeing them off” in safety, 
is often mentioned in Acts, and is incul- 
cated more than once as a duty by St. 
Paul (see reff.). 

Ver. 17. τοῦτο οὖν βουλόμενος κ-.τ.λ.: 
when therefore I was thus minded, did I 
shew fickleness? ‘The article τῇ before 
ἐλαφρίᾳ can hardly be pressed so as to 
convey the meaning “that fickleness 


which you lay to my charge”; it is. 


merely generic.—4 ἃ βουλεύομαι κ-.τ.λ.: 
or the things that I purpose, do I pur- 
pose according to the flesh, that there 
should be with me the Yea, yea, and the 
Nay, nay? That is, ‘‘Are my plans 
made like those of a worldly man, that 
they may be changed according to my 
own Caprice, Yes to-day, No to-morrow?” 
His argument is that, although the details 
of his original plan had been altered, yet 
in spirit and purpose it was unchanged; 
there is no room for any charge of in- 
consistency or fickleness. His principles 
of action are unchangeable, as is the 
Gospel which he preaches. He had pro- 
mised to go to Corinth, and he would go, 
For a similar use of the phrase κατὰ 
τῶν κατ see reff., and cf.chap.v.16. The 
reduplication val val... οὔ οὔ is not 
altogether easy to explain; but we have 
val ναὶ repeated similarly in Matt. v. 37, 
and perhaps we may also compare the 
᾿Αμὴν, ᾿Αμήν of St. John’s Gospel (e.g., 
x. 1). Some critics (e.g., Steck) have 
regarded val val... οὔ οὔ here as an 
actual quotation from Matt. v. 37. But 
apart from the fact that this opinion rests 
on a quite untenable theory as to the 
date of this Epistle (see Introd., p. 12), 


the context of the words will not lend 
itself to any such interpretation (see 
above). 

Ver. 18. πιστὸς δὲ ὁ Θεὸς ὅτι κιτιλ.: 
but as God is faithful, our word, ete. 
For the construction, cf. the similar 
forms of asseveration ζῇ κύριος ὅτι, ‘as 
the Lord liveth”? (1 Sam. xx. 3, 2 Sam. 
ii. 27), and ἔστιν ἀλήθεια Χριστοῦ ἐν 
ἐμοὶ ὅτι, “45 the truth of Christ is in 
me’ (xi. το). For πιστός as applied to 
God, see Deut. vii. 9, 1 Cor. i. 9, x. 13, 
1 Thess. v. 24, 2 Thess. iii. 3, 2 Tim. ti, 
13, and cf. τ᾿ Sam. xv. 20.--- λόγος ἡμῶν 
ὁ πρὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἔστιν Ναὶ καὶ Οὔ: our 
word (sc., my personal communications 
about my journey, as well as the message 
of the Gospel) towards you is not Yea and 
Nay. I donot deceive you or vacillate 
in my purpose: οὕ. ii. 17. 

Ver. 19. He has appealed to the 
faithfulness of God, and this suggests 
the thought of the unchangeableness of 
Christ.—é τοῦ Θεοῦ yap vids «.T.A.: for 
the Son of God, Christ Fesus, who 
was proclaimed among you by us. The 
position of τοῦ Θεοῦ before γάρ (as in 
the true text) brings out the sequence of 
thought better, as it brings Θεοῦ (the 
connecting word) into prominence.—8v’ 
ἐμοῦ καὶ Σιλουανοῦ καὶ Τιμοθέου : even 
by me and Silvanus and Timothy. These 

ree brought the Gospel to Corinth 
(Acts xviii. 5), and were closely associ- 
ated during the Apostle’s labours in that 
city (1 Thess. i. 1, 2 Thess. i. 1). Sil- 
vanus is only another form of the name 
Silas; he was a prophet (Acts xv. 32), 
and apparently, like St. Paul, a Roman 
citizen (Acts xvi. 37), and shared the 


oni ea 








ee iin ~ 


17—22. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


45 


Τιμοθέου, οὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ καὶ οὔ, ἀλλὰ vai ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν " 20. " ppg δ τ 
ὅσαι γὰρ " ἐπαγγελίαι " Θεοῦ, ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ ναὶ, Kai! ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ ἀμὴν, 1. αι. 


τῷ Θεῷ πρὸς δόξαν δι᾿ ἡμῶν. 


21. ὁ δὲ "βεβαιῶν ἡμᾶς 2 σὺν ὑμῖν 
εἰς Χριστὸν, καὶ "χρίσας ἡμᾶς, Θεός " 


Rom, xv. 
8; 1 Cor. 
i. 6, 8; Col. 
ii. 7; cf. 


22. 6% καὶ “σφραγισάμενος ii. 7: ὦ ; 


ἡμᾶς, καὶ δοὺς τὸν " ἀῤῥαβῶνα τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν. u Acta ἐν. δ), 


Heb, i. g. 
Eph. i. 14. 


1 και ev a 


v John vi. 27; Eph. i. 13, iv. 30; Rev. vii. 3, 4. 


w Gen. xxxvili. 17; chap. v.5; 


DbcEKL and the Harclean; 810 και δι᾽ avrov has the stronger 


support of SsABCGP 17, the Peshitto and the Bohairic. 
3 C and the Harclean stand almost alone in reading vpas ovv ἡμῖν; B has vpas 


συν υμιν and vpas at the end of the verse. 


3 $cBCcDELO have o και σφρ.; G and the Latins have και o opp.; while 


Oe an 17 and the Bohairic omit o altogether. 


.H, enclose it in brackets. 


Apostle’s perils during the whole of his 
second missionary journey (Acts xv. 40— 
xviii. 18). We hear of him again at 
Rome (1 Pet. v. 12).---ὐὐκ ἐγένετο ναὶ 
καὶ οὔ, ἀλλὰ ναὶ ἐν αὐτῷ γέγονεν: was 
not Yea and Nay, but in Him is (sc., has 
been and continues to be) Yea. There 
is no doubtfulness or vacillation in the 
words of Christ (Matt. vii. 29, John xii. 
50); and He continually emphasised the 
positive and certain character of His 
τά by the introductory formula 
᾿Αμὴν, ἀμήν. More than this, however, 
is involved here. Christ, who is the 
Object and Sum of St, Paul’s preaching, 
is unchangeable (Heb. xiii. 8), for He is 
not only ‘‘true” (Rev. iii. 7), but “the 
Truth”? (John xiv. 6): He is, in brief, 
ὁ ᾿Αμήν (Rev. iii. 14), and so it may be 
said that an Eternal ‘* Yea” has come 
into being (γέγονεν, through His incar- 
nate Life) in Him. 

Ver. 20. ὅσαι yap ἐπαγγελίαι x.7.A. : 
for how many soever be the promises of 
God, in Him is the Yea. Not only was 
Christ a διάκονος περιτομῆς . . . εἰς Td 
βεβαιῶσαι τὰς ἐπαγγελίας τῶν πατέρων 
(Rom. xv. 8), but He is Himself, in His 
own Person, the true fulfilment and re- 
capitulation of them all (cf. Gal. iii. 8).— 
διὸ καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ τὸ ᾿Αμήν k.t.A.: where- 
fore also through Him is the “ Amen,” 
to the glory of God, through us. The 
reading of the received text conceals the 
force ofthese words, It is because Christ 
is the consummation, the “Yea” of the 
Divine promises, that the ‘“*Amen” is 
specially fitting at the close of doxolo- 
{9 in public worship (1 Cor. xiv. 16). 

he thought of the fulfilment of God’s 

romises naturally leads to a doxolo 
(Rom. xv. 9), to which a solemn ’Apyy, 
the Hebrew form of the Greek vat, whose 


Tisch. retains it before και, but 


significance as applied to Christ has just 
been expounded, is a fitting climax. δι᾽ 
ἡμῶν in this clause includes, of course, 
both St. Paul and his correspondents; 
it refers, indeed, to the gency practice 
of Christians in their public devotions. 
Ver. 21. ὁ δὲ βεβαιῶν x.7.A.: now He 
that stablisheth us with you into Christ 
and anointed us is God, etc. For the 
form of the sentence cf. chap. v. 5. The 
ultimate ground of St. Paul’s steadfast- 
ness in Christ is God Himself; and having 
been led on to say this, he adds σὺν ὑμῖν, 
in order to introduce (as he does at every 
opportunity in the early part of the 
Epistle) the idea of unity between him 
and his Corinthian converts. The play 
on words Χριστόν .. . χρίσας is obvious; 
the only other place in the N.T. where 
the idea is found of the “anointing” of 
the Christian believer by God is 1 John 
ii, 20, 27, ὑμεῖς χρίσμα ἔχετε ἀπὸ τοῦ 
ἁγίου. Deissmann has pointed out (Bibel- 
studien, p. 104) that βεβαιόω and dppa- 
βών (see note below) are both technical 
terms belonging to the law courts (cf. 
Lev. xxv. 23, LXX), and that βεβαιῶν is 
here deliberately used rather than κυριῶν 
(Gal. iii. 15), or any other such word, 
Ver. 22. S καὶ σφρ. ἡμᾶς x.7.A.: who 
also sealed us (sc., all Christians), and 
gies us the earnest of the Spirit in our 
earts. The aorists, σφραγισάμενος . . - 
Sovs, point to acts completed at a definite 
moment in the past; and this can only 
mean the moment of baptism. This, too, 
is the best explanation of the parallel 
passages, Eph. i. 13, iv. 30. The gift of 
the Holy Spirit is repeatedly mentioned 
as consequent on baptism (Acts ii. 38, 
xix, 6); and the σφραγίς, or “seal” of 
baptism, is a common image .in early 
Christian literature (¢.g., [2 Clem.,] § 8, 


46 


x 1 Cor. vii. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


I, 23—24. 


23. ἐγὼ δὲ μάρτυρα τὸν Θεὸν ἐπικαλοῦμαι ἐπὶ τὴν ἐμὴν ψυχὴν, 


; ch 
nik δ, δι ὅτι "φειδόμενος ὑμῶν οὐκέτι ἦλθον εἰς Κόρινθον. 24. " οὐχ ὅτι 
4. : ς ᾿ ’ : 
y Chap. ili. *xupredopev ὑμῶν " τῆς πίστεως, ἀλλὰ συνεργοί ἐσμεν τῆς χαρᾶς ὑμῶν, 


12, ἷν. ὲ 
17; 2 Thess. iii. 9. 


z Rom. vi. 9, 14, vii. 1, xiv. 9; 1 Tim. vi. 15. 


1 G has οὐκ, which also seems to have been read by the Peshitto, Bohairic and 


ἃ, e, g of the Latins. 


2 DEG and the Latins give the order rns πίστεως ὑμων. 


ware +++ THY σφραγῖδα ἄσπιλον). 
The seal” of = Church is given by 
St. Paul (2 Tim. ii. 19) as “The Lord 
knoweth them that are His” (Num. xvi. 
5), and “Let every one that nameth the 
Name of the Lord depart from unright- 
eousness” (Isa. lii. 11; of. Num. xvi. 26, 
Isa. xxvi. 13). The ἀρραβών (see an ex- 
haustive note in Pearson, On the Creed, 
viii.), i.¢., Pay, is a first instalment, 
given in pledge of full payment in due 
course; see reff. and cf. Rom. vili. 16, τὸ 
πνεῦμα συνμαρτυρεῖ τῷ πνεύματι ἡμῶν 
ὅτι ἐσμὲν τέκνα Θεοῦ : here is the ἀπαρχή 
τοῦ πνεύματος (Rom. viii. 23). For the 
constr. διδόναι ἐν cf. Ezek. xxxvi. 26, 
John iii. 35, Acts iv. 12, chap. viii. 1, 16. 

Ver. 23—ii. 4. THE REAL REASON OF 
THE POSTPONEMENT OF HIS VISIT ΤῸ 
CoRINTH WAS THAT HE DID NOT WISH 
HIS NEXT VISIT TO BE PAINFUL, AS THE 
LAST HAD BEEN.—Vert. 23. ἐγὼ δὲ pdp- 
τυρα τὸν Θεὸν ἐπικ. K.TA.: Sut (Sc, 
whatever my opponents may say) I invoke 
God as a witness against my soul, 56.» if I 
speak falsely; cf. Rom. i. 9, Gal. i. 20, 
Phil. i. 8, 1 Thess. ii. 5, 10. For ἐπί 
used in this way cf. εἰς μαρτύριον ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτούς (Luke ix. 5). The A.V. and R.V. 
“upon my soul” do not bring out the 
sense clearly. —8t. φειδόμενος ὑμῶν 
«.t.A.: that to spare you I came not again 
to Corinth, i.e., “1 paid no fresh visit,” 
“1 gave up the thought of coming”. 
The A.V., “I came not as yet,” is here 
quite misleading (cf. xiii. 2 and 1 Cor. iv. 
21). 

Ver. 24. This verse is parenthetical, 
and introduced to guard against mis- 
understanding. οὐχ ὅτι κυριεύομεν ὑμῶν 
τῆς πίστεως: not that we have lordship 
over your faith. This is not the depart- 
ment of his Apostolic authority (cf. Luke 
xxii. 25, 1 Pet. v. 3).—éAAa συνεργοί 
«.t-A.: but we are (only) fellow-workers 
in (producing) your joy; a parenthesis 
within a parenthesis, not necessary to the 
sense, but added to emphasise once more 
his sense of the common ties between 


him and the Corinthians (cf. Rom. xvi. 
3, Chap. viii. 23, Col. iv. 11).---τῇ γὰρ 
πίστει ἑστήκατε: for by your faith ye 
stand. If it were dominated by the 
authority of another, it would not be thus 
the instrument of their steadfastness. 
Another (inferior) interpretation is, “ As 
regards your faith ye stand,” #.e., “1 
have no fault to find with you so far as 
your faith is concerned ”’; but the parallel, 
Rom. xi. 20, seems to fix the dative as 
instrumental. 

CuapTeR II.—Ver.1. ἔκρινα δὲ ἐμαυ- 
τῷ τοῦτο κιτιλ.: but I decided this for 
my own sake, that I would not come 
again to you with sorrow ; i.e., 1 deter- 
mined that my next visit should not be 
painful, as my last was. The juxtaposi- 
tion of πάλιν with ἐν λύπῃ (see crit. 
note) requires that interpretation. Hence 


the former visit in St. Paul’s mind could 


not have been his first visit to Corinth 
(Acts xviii. 1 ff.), for that was not ἐν 
λύπῃ. And thus we are forced to con- 
clude that another visit was paid from 
Ephesus, of which no details have been 
preserved (cf. xii. 14, xiii. τὴ. The con- 
ditions of the scanty evidence available 
seem best satisfied by supposing that St. 
Paul’s second visit to Corinth was paid 
from Ephesus during the period Acts 
xix. 10, Alarming news had probably 
reached him, and he determined to make 
enquiries for himself. On his return to 
Ephesus he wrote the letter (now lost) 
alluded to in 1 Cor. v. 9, in which he 
charged the Corinthians *‘ to keep no com- 
pany with fornicators”’, Subsequently to 
this he again received distressing intelli- 
gence (1 Cor. i. 11, v. I, etc.), whereupon 
he wrote the first canonical Epistle (see 
Introd., p. 7). 

Ver. 2. εἰ yap ἐγὼ κιτιλ.: for if I 
make you sorry, who then is he that makes 
me glad, but he whois made sorry by me? 
His argument is; When I make you 
sorry, it is that you may repent (see 
chap. vii. 9), and so gladden me: my 
change of purpose was not prompted by 
the desire of giving pain, but on the con. 





: 
; 


1. 1-5. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 47 


"τῇ yap "πίστει "ἑστήκατε: II. 1. "ἔκρινα δὲ ἐμαυτῷ τοῦτο, * om. x 


20; cf. 
"τὸ μὴ πάλιν ἐλθεῖν 3 ἐν λύπῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 2. εἰ γὰρ ἐγὼ λυπῶ τ ai. 
ὑμᾶς, καὶ τίς ἐστιν ὃ ὁ " εὐφραίνων pe, εἰ μὴ ὁ λυπούμενος ἐξ ἐμοῦ ; 2 αὶν 
3. καὶ ἔγραψα ὑμῖν “ " τοῦτο ὅ “ αὐτὸ, ἵνα μὴ ἐλθὼν λύπην ® exw! ἀφ᾽ 13. 
ὧν ἔδει με χαίρειν - ἅ πεποιθὼς “ἐπὶ πάντας ὑμᾶς, ὅτι ἡ ἐμὴ χαρὰ το; aa 


πάντων ὑμῶν ἐστιν. 4. ἐκ γὰρ πολλῆς "θλίψεως καὶ ἦ συνοχῆς - one, xt 





—— ---«. gee - 2 
— - ἌΣ lo Sa ΝΡ. Ψ,. 
“ 2) SE " == eS oe ree = 


6 ; 
καρδίας ἔγραψα ὑμῖν διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων, οὐχ ἵνα λυπηθῆτε, ἀλλὰ vii. 11. 


τὴν ὃ ἀγάπην ἵνα γνῶτε ἣν ἔχω περισσοτέρως εἰς " ὑμᾶς. 


2 Thess. 
im. 2 
e Refi. i. » 
3: 


5. Εἰ δέ τις λελύπηκεν, οὐκ ἐμὲ λελύπηκεν, ἀλλ᾽ " ἀπὸ " μέρους, f Job xxx. 


χχὶ.25. 
g Reff. i. 14. 


1B 17, the Bohairic and Harclean have yap; D* has ve; all other authorities Se. 


2s8ABCKLOP place ελθειν after υμας ; DEG and the Peshitto read ελθεὶιν προς 
vpas, and the Bohairic has to py ελθειν προς υμας εν λυπῃ (omitting παλιν). The 
received order is found in a few cursives only. 


3 SscDEGKLOP, etc., give ἐστιν; om. $§*ABC and the Bohairic. 
4 secCcDEGKL, the Syriac and (most) Latin vss. have vpty, which is omitted by 


S$*ABC*OP 17 and the Bohairic. 


5 CO give avto rovro (cf. vii. 11); A and the Bohairic omit avro. 
6 DEG and a few other authorities have λυπὴν em: λυπὴν (from a reminiscence of 


Phil. ii. 27). 


7 exw NWcDEGKL ; better σχω, $*ABOP (see on i. 15). 


8 G has wa γνωτε THY ἀγάπην. 


trary by my fear that, if I visited you as 
I had intended, you would sadden me: 
I should have had to grieve, and be 
grieved by those who are the source of 
my purest joy. With the introductory 
καὶ tis, “Who then,” the implied 
answer being ‘* No one,” cf. Mark x. 26, 
καὶ τίς δύναται σωθῆναι, and chap. ii. 16. 

Ver. 3. Kal ἔγραψα τοῦτο αὐτὸ : and 
I wrote this very thing ; i.e., 1 communi- 
cated my change of plan (1 Cor. xvi. 5 
ff.). So ἔκρινα τοῦτο in ver. 1. (The 
translation ‘‘ just for this reason,” taking 
τοῦτο αὐτό adverbially, is also admis- 
sible; cf, 2 Pet. i. 5).—tva μὴ ἐλθὼν 
λύπην «.t.A.: lest when I came I should 
have sorrow from them from whom I 
ought to rejoice. ἀφ᾽ ὧν is for ar 
ἐκείνων ad’ ὧν; cf. τ Pet. ii. 12, iii. 16.— 
πεποιθὼς ἐπὶ πάντας ὑμᾶς K.T.A.: hav- 
ing confidence in you all, that my joy is 
the joy of you all; i.e., having confidence 
in the perfect sympathy between himself 
and his correspondents. He could only 
be made glad if they were made glad; 


‘and so to visit them for the purpose of 


rebuking them would be as painful to 
him as to them. Observe the repeated 
πάντας ... πάντων : despite the factions 
in Corinth (x Cor. iii. 4) he must think of 
them all as his friends (cf. xiii. 13). 


9 G has προς vpas. 


Ver. 4. ἐκ yap πολλῆς θλίψεως x.7.X. : 
for out of much affliction and anguish of 
heart I wrote to you with many tears. 
This describes the state of mind in which 
he wrote 1 Cor., if the view of the situa- 
tion which has been adopted in this com- 
mentary be correct (see Introd., p. 13).— 
διὰ πολλῶν δακρύων : we have διά used, 
somewhat similarly, with the genitive of 
the attendant circumstances, in Rom. ii. 
27, iv. II, viii. 25, xiv. 20, chap. v. 7, Heb. 
xii. 1, Rev. xxi. 24, etc.—odx ἵνα λυπη- 
θῆτε κιτ.λ.: not that ye should be made 
sorry, but that ye should know the love 
which I have so abundantly to you, 
ἀγάπη, as a grace especially to be ex- 
hibited in Christian intercourse, is re- 
peatedly dwelt on by St. Paul. The 
word has been described as ‘“ ecclesi- 
astical ᾿" and as having been first intro- 
duced to literature in the LXX. But it 
has been recently found in papyri of 
the Ptolemaic period (Deissmann, Bibel- 
studien, p. 81), and it thus appears that 
the LXX only took over a word already 
current in the speech of Greek Egypt. 
Here the position of ἀγάπην before ἵνα 
gives it special emphasis; c/., for a like 
order, Acts xix. 4, Rom. xi. 31. περισ- 
σοτέρως may mean ‘more abundantly,” 
sc., than to other Churches; but it is 


48 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B It. 


be These ἵνα ph " ἐπιβαρῶ πάντας ὑμᾶς. 6. 'ἱκανὸν τῷ ἢ τοιούτῳ ἡ ' ἐπιτιμία 
Thess. iii αὕτη ἡ ὑπὸ "τῶν " πλειόνων - 7. ὥστε Ἀ τοὐναντίον μᾶλλον ' ὑμᾶς 


8 only. 


ag Sree er 5 χαρίσασθαι καὶ παρακαλέσαι, μήπως τῇ περισσοτέρᾳ λύπῃ " κατα- 
ἢ τὸ fil. ποθῇ ὁ τοιοῦτος. 8. διὸ παρακαλῶ ὑμᾶς “ κυρῶσαι εἰς αὐτὸν ἀγάπην. 


2s t= 
2. 
k 1 Cor.v. 5; 


g. εἰς τοῦτο yap καὶ ἔγραψα,; ἵνα γνῶ τὴν " δοκιμὴν ὑμῶν, εἰ * εἰς 


chaps. x. 11, xi. 13. I Wied, ΕΝ. τὸ only οἱ 6 Mar. 9 7 m 1 Cor. ix. 19, x. 5, xv. 6; chaps. 
3 Ma 


iv. 15,ix.2; Phili.rgy, on Gal ii. 7; 1 


et. iii. 9 only; 


ce. iii, 22. ο Chaps. ii. 10, xii. 13; 
q Gal. itt 


Eph. iv. 32; Col. ii. 13, iii. 13; Lk. 42. px Cor. xv. 54 (Isa. xxv. 8); chap. v. 


15; Gen. xxiii. 20; Lev. xxv.g0. f 


Rom. v. 4; chaps. viii. 2, ix. 13, xili. 3; hil. ἢ μὰ δῶν 


1 AB and the Peshitto (which W.H. follow here) omit μαλλον, but it is found in 
all other authorities; DEG 17 place it after vpas. 


3 G inserts vpev (vobis, f, g, and so the Bohairic) after eypawa. 


8 6, g prefix πάντων to upev. 


4 AB 17 have 9, which W.H. place in their margin; almost all other authorities 


have εἰ. 


quite legitimate to take it as used without 
any special comparative force (cf. x. 8). 

Vv. 5-11. THE OFFENDER HAS BEEN 
SUFFICIENTLY PUNISHED: THE APOSTLE 
ACQUIESCES IN THEIR REMISSION OF THE 
PENALTY OF 1 Cor. v. 1-5.—Ver. 5. εἰ δέ 
τις λελύπηκεν K.T.A.: but if any one, 50.» 
the incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. 1, his 
name being suppressed with a rare deli- 
cacy of feeling, hath caused sorrow, he 
hath caused sorrow, not to me, sc.,1 am 
not the person directly aggrieved, but to 
some extent (that I press not too heavily 
on him) to you all. That is to say to 
the words ἀπὸ μέρους are added by the 
Apostle ἵνα μὴ ἐπιβαρῶ (sc., αὐτόν). 
The sentence has been otherwise con- 
strued “he hath not caused sorrow to 
me [alone], but [only] in part [having 
caused sorrow to you also]: [this I add] 
that I may not press heavily on you all,” 
sc., by representing myself as the only 
person aggrieved. But this would re- 
me εἰ μή instead of ἀλλά, and, further, 

oes not suit the context so well as the 
rendering given above, which treats tva 
μὴ ἐπιβαρῶ as parenthetic. 

Ver. 6. ἱκανὸν τῷ τοιούτῳ κ.τιλ.: 
sufficient to such an one (the word used 
in 1 Cor. v. 5 to indicate the offender 
is this punishment (which was in ‘cto 
by the majority. The directions given by 
the Apostle for dealing with the offender 
had probably been carried out with harsh- 
ness and severity ; he now suggests that 
the punishment might be remitted, and 
the guilty man forgiven, ἐπιτιμία in the 
Attic orators is used for “" the possession 
of political rights,” but it came to mean 
(see reff.) penalty or requital ; the punish- 
ment (see 1 Cor. v. 5) would seem to 
have been of a disciplinary, and not 
merely punitive, character; it was pro- 


bably like the formal excommunication 
of a later age (cf. also 1 Tim. i. 20), 
and involved the exclusion of the guilty 
person from the privileges of the Christian 
Society. That it was inflicted only by 
“ the majority ” (for so we must translate 
τῶν πλειόνων ; see reff.) is sufficiently 
accounted for by remembering the pre- 
sence of an anti-Pauline party at Corinth, 
who would not be likely to follow the 
Apostle’s instructions. The construction 
ἱκανὸν . . . ἡ ἐπιτιμία (ἐστι, rather than 
ἔστω, is the verb to be supplied) affords 
an instance of a neuter adjectival pre- 
dicate set over against a feminine subject 
(cf. Matt. vi. 34); ἱκανὸν seems to be 
used here like the Latin satis. 

Ver. 7. ὥστε τοὐναντίον μᾶλλον 
κιτιλ.: so that contrariwise ye should 
rather forgive him and comfort him (cf., 
for the sentiment, Ecclus. viii. 5, Col. iii. 
13, Eph. iv. 32). We should expect some 
verb like δεῖν, but it is perhaps sufficiently 
suggested by ὥστε. χαρίζεσθαι is gene- 
rally found in the N.T. in the sense of 
‘¢ to bestow a favour”; but it conveys the 
special meaning ‘to forgive”’ in the pas- 
sages referred to above.—pyjrws τῇ περ- 
vocotépg λύπῃ K.T-A.: lest such an one 
should be swallowed up with his excessive 
sorrow, sc., should be driven to despaiz 
through overmuch severity. Again (see 
on ver. 4 above) we are not to press the 
comparative force of περισσοτέρᾳ. 

Ver. 8. διὸ aie γ ὑμᾶς «TA. : 
wherefore I beseech you (or ‘‘exhort you,” 
see on i. 4) to confirm your love toward 
him. Authority “to bind” and “to 
loose” had been committed to the 
Apostles (Matt. xviii. 18); St. Paul had 
exercised the former function (1 Cor. v. 
5), and he now discharges the latter. 
The various meanings of παρακαλεῖν 


6—12. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


49 


10. ᾧ δέ τι ᾿ χαρίζεσθε, καὶ ἐγώ καὶ γὰρ" ἀφ phil 
ii. 8 only. 
Reff. ii. 7. 


11. ἵνα μὴ “ πλεονεκτηθῶμεν ὑπὸ τοῦ “ Σατανᾶ " οὐ γὰρ αὐτοῦ τὰ ἡ Cape: vil 
*vonpata ἀγνοοῦμεν. 2, xii. 17, 
12. Ἐλθὼν δὲ εἰς τὴν Τρωάδα εἰς 2 τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ Thess. iv. 


18; 1 
Ζ on Υ. 
w Rom. xvi. 20; 1 Cor. v. 5, vii. 5; ort xi. 14, xii. 7; 1 Thess. ii. 18; 2 Thess. ii. 9; τ Tim. i. 20, v. 15. 
x Chaps. iii. 14, iv. 4, x. 5, xi. 3; Phil. iv. 7 only; Bar. ii. 8; 3 Macc. v. 30. 


πάντα " ὑπήκοοί ἐστε. 
ἐγὼ εἴ! τι κεχάρισμαι, ᾧ κεχάρισμαι, δι᾿ ὑμᾶς, ἐν “προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ, | 


1 The better reading is καὶ yap eyw o κεχαρ. εἰ τι κεχαρ.» with SABCGO, etc. ; 
received text DbKL 17, the Harclean, etc. 





2G and the Latin vss. have δια το evayyeAtov; DE δια τον evayyeAtov. 


have been noted above (on i. 4); it is 
interesting to observe here how the word 
is used in one sense in ver. 7, and in 
another in close sequence in ver. 8 (cf. 
the two senses of παραδίδωμι in 1 Cor. 
xi. 23). For ἀγάπη see on ver. 4 above. 

Ver. 9. εἰς τοῦτο yap K.t.A.: for to 
this end also did I write, viz., that I 
might know the proof of you, whether ye 
were obedient in all things; i.e., his 
object in writing the former letter (1 Cor.) 
was not only the reformation of the 
offender, but the testing of the Cor- 
inthians’ acceptance of his apostolic 
authority (cf. vii. 12). For the constr. 
εἰς τοῦτο yap... iva... cf. Rom. 
xiv.9. It is hard to decide between the 
readings el, ‘‘ whether,” or ἦν ‘“ where- 
by” (see crit. note); but the general 
sense is the same in both cases. A com- 
parison of this verse with vii. 12 has led 
some critics to doubt whether chaps. ii. 
and vii. really refer at all to the offender of 
1 Cor. v. 1; for the expressed object of St. 
Paul’s communication was to prove the 
loyalty of the Corinthians to himself. 
And thus it is supposed that the indi- 
vidual in view is some bitter personal 
opponent of St. Paul (see Tertullian, de 
Pudic. xiii. f.). But vv. 5-9 seem quite 
consecutive, and we find it more natural 
to interpret ver. 5 in reference to 1 Cor. 
v. 1 ff. And vii. 12 seems clearly to dis- 
tinguish 6 ἀδικηθείς from St. Paul him- 
self (see Introd., p. 15). 

Ver. το. ᾧ δέ τι χαρίζεσθε x.7.X.: 
but to whom ye forgive anything, I for- 

ive also; for what I also have forgiven 
Gf I have forgiven anything) for your 
sakes have I forgiven it in the face of 
Christ. This is not a general principle, 
but a statement of the Apostle’s feelings 
at the present juncture ; if they are willing 
to forgive the offender, so is he. Whether 
he advocates punishment or forgiveness it 
is always δι᾽ ὑμᾶς, ‘for your sakes,” and 
it is ἐν προσώπῳ Χριστοῦ, “in the sight 

VOL, III. 


of Christ”. “τρόσωπον (see on i. 11) is a 
face,” and so ἐν προσ. Xp. is a stronger 
way of saying ἐνώπιον Χριστοῦ (cf. chap. 
iv. 2, viii. 21, Gal. i, 20); the Apostle 
claims that his acts of condemnation and 
forgiveness are done as “in the presence 
of Christ”. Both A.V. and R.V. render 
‘tin the person of Christ,” which would 
mean that St. Paul had acted as Christ’s 
delegate. But the usage of πρόσωπον in 
2 Cor. is against this interpretation. 

Ver. 11. ἵνα μὴ πλεονεκτηθῶμεν «.7.A. : 
lest we, sc., you and I together, be 
robbed by Satan; i.e., lest we drive 
sinners to despair and so let Satan 
capture them from us. ‘“ The offender 
was to be delivered over τῷ Σατανᾷ εἰς 
ὄλεθρον τῆς σαρκός (1 Cor. v. 5)—care 
must be taken lest we πλεονεκτηθῶμεν 
ὑπὸ τοῦ Σατανᾶ, and his soul perish 
likewise ’’ (Alford). Observe that in St. 
Paul’s writings (except chap. xii. 7; see 
reff.) Σατανᾶς takes the article, ‘the 
Satan,’”’ the adversary; it has not yet 
come to be regularly used as a proper 
name (but cf. Matt. iv. το, Mark ili. 23). 
—ot γὰρ αὐτοῦ x.7.A.: for we are not 
ignorant of his devices. νόημα ‘uae reff.) 
is generally (always in this Ep.) used in 
a bad sense, of the thoughts of man’s 
unregenerate heart. Here τὰ νοήματα 
are the designs of the adversary of souls. 

Vv. 12-17. HE WAS DISAPPOINTED AT 
NOT MEETING TITUS IN TROAS, BUT 
HE REJOICES NOW TO LEARN THAT HIS 
MESSAGE OF REPROOF HAS BEEN LOYALLY 
RECEIVED IN CORINTH.—Ver. 12. ἐλθὼν 
δέ κιτιλ.:; but (the particle δέ marki 
the resumption of his original subject) 
when I came to Troas, for the purposes 
of the Gospel of Christ (cf. ix. 13). He 
stayed there seven days preaching and 
teaching on his return from Greece (Acts 
xx. 6-12). We are not to press the 
article and translate “the Troad”; cf. 
Acts xx. 5, 6, where we have ἐν Τρῳάδ, 
and εἰς τὴν Τρῳάδα used of the same 


ζο 


y 1 Cor. xvi. 
9; Col. iv. 


: Rev. 
fi. δ: of. 


Isa. xlv.1.” ἀποταξάμενος αὐτοῖς, ἐξῆλθον εἰς Μακεδονίαν. 


z Rom, xvi 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


Il. 


θύρας μοι " ἀνεῳγμένης "ἐν "Κυρίῳ, 13. οὐκ ἔσχηκα " ἄνεσιν τῷ 
πνεύματί μου, τῷ μὴ εὑρεῖν 2 με Τίτον τὸν ἀδελφόν μου - ἀλλὰ 


14. “ τῷ δὲ " Θεῷ 


12; 1Cor.*ydpig τῷ πάντοτε “θριαμβεύοντι ἡμᾶς év*® τῷ Χριστῷ, καὶ τὴν 


ἔχ, τ; Eph 
ii. 21. 
a Acts xxiv. 


“ὀσμὴν τῆς γνώσεως αὐτοῦ ἦ φανεροῦντι δι’ ἡμῶν ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ. 


;chaps. 15. ὅτι Χριστοῦ " εὐωδία ἐσμὲν τῷ * Θεῷ ἐν τοῖς " σωζομένοις καὶ ἐν 


i, 5, vii 
13; 2 Thess. i. 7 only. vi. 
δὰ vii. 25:1 Cor. xv. 57; chaps. viii. 16, ix. 15. 


Phil. iv. 18 (Gen. viii. 21; Lev. i. 9) only; cf. Cant. i. 3. 
g Acts ii. 47; 1 Cor. i. 18, xv. 2; 1 Pet. iii. 21. 


xi. 6. 


b Mk. vi. 46; Lk. ix. 61, xiv. 353: Acts xviii. 18, 21 only. 
ο 


ς Rom. vi. 
e John xii. 3; Eph. v. 2; 


d Col. ii. | bee 
f Chaps. iii. 3, iv. 10, 11, V. 10, I1, Vii. 18, 


1 Most authorities have τῳ py εὑρεῖν; to LP; tov ΟΞ 73; ev τῳ DE 17. 


3 ευρισκειν D*. 


lace in consecutive verses. Troas would 

a natural place of rendezvous, as it 
was the point of embarkation for Mace- 
donia (see Acts xvi. 8); and here St. 
Paul had expected to meet Titus, who 
had been sent from Ephesus to Corinth, 
with an unnamed companion, as the 
bearer of 1 Cor. om mgt P. phe 
θύρας μοι ἀνεῳγμένης ἐν Κυρίῳ: and a 
ον oa opened Yor me in the Lord. This 
is not the “ door of faith” (Acts xiv. 27), 
but the door of opportunity at Troas (see 
reff. above), which he describes here as 
*‘opened,” a phrase which he had used 
a short time before of his prospects of 
usefulness at Ephesus (1 Cor. xvi. 9). It 
is open ἐν Κυρίῳ; that is the sphere, as 
it were, of his apostolic labours (see 
reff.). 

Ver. 13. οὐκ ἔσχηκα ἄνεσιν τῷ πν.: 
I had no relief for my spirit. So he 
Says again (vil. 5) ἐλθόντων ἡμῶν eis 
Μακεδονίαν οὐδεμίαν ἔσχηκεν ἄνεσιν ἧ 
σὰρξ ἡμῶν. We are not to lay much 
stress on πνεῦμα being used here and 
σάρξ there (yet cf. chap. vii. 1); σάρξ 
in the later passage is used of the whole 
mortal nature of man, which is subject 
to distress and disappointment; and 
πνεῦμα here is a general term for the 
“mind” (cf. Rom. i. 9, viii. 6, xii. rz, x 
Cor. ii. 11, v. 3, xiv. 14, chap. vii. 1, 13, 
etc., for St. Paul’s use of πνεῦμα for the 
human spirit, and see on iii. 6 below). 
For the tense of ἔσχηκα, see on i. 9.— 
τῷ μὴ ἐὑρεῖν «.t.A.: because I found 
not Titus my brother: but taking my 
leave of them (sc., the disciples at Troas) 
I went forth into Macedonia, ἐξέρχεσθαι 
is the word used in Acts xvi. 10, xx. 1 of 
“ going out” of Asia to Macedonia; cf. 
vili. 17. 

Ver. 14. τῷ δὲ Θεῷ ts K.T.A.: διέ 
thanks be to God, Pig Toetead of giving 
details of the information which Titus 


8 17, 37, 73 have ev Χριστῳ Ἴησου. 


4 K omits τῳ Seg. 


brought to him in Macedonia (chap. vii. 
6), he bursts out into a characteristic 
doxology, which leads him into a long 
digression, the main topic of the Epistle 
not coming into view again until vi. 11.— 
τῷ πάντοτε θριαμβεύοντι: who always, 
sc., even in times of anxiety and distress, 
leadeth usin triumph in Christ. θριαμ- 
βεύειν, ‘to lead as captive in a triumphal 
procession,” occurs again in this sense 
Col. ii. 15. The rendering of the A.V., 
“‘which causeth us to triumph,” though 
yielding a good sense here (and despite 
the causative force of verbs in -eve), 
must be abandoned, as no clear instance 
of θριαμβεύειν in such a signification 
has been produced. The splendid image 
before the writer’s mind is that of a 
Roman triumph, which, though he had 
never seen it, must have been familiar to 
him as it was to every citizen of the 
Empire. He thinks of God as the Victor 
(Rev. vi. 2) entering the City into which 
the glory and honour of the nations 
(Rev. xxi. 26) is brought; the Apostle 
as ‘in Christ”—as a member of the 
Body of Christ—is one of the captives, 
by means of whom the knowledge and 
fame of the Victor is made manifest. 
He rejoices that he has been so used by 
God, as would appear from the tidin 
which Titus has brought him.—r«at τὴν 
ὀσμὴν τῆς γνώσεως x«.t.A.: and maketh 
manifest through us the savour of the 
knowledge of Him (sc., of Christ) in every 
place, sc., at Corinth as as in Troas 
and Macedonia. It is possible that the 
metaphor of the ὀσμή is suggested by 
and is part of that of the triumph; ¢.g., 
Plutarch (Zimil, Paul. c. 32) says that 
the temples were “full of fumigations” 
during the passage of the procession, 
But ἢ εὐωδίας is a frequent LXX 
phrase (see reff.). 

Ver. 15. ὅτι Xp. εὐωδία κιτιλι; for 











13--- 17. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β 


51 


τοῖς * ἀπολλυμένοις " 16. οἷς μὲν ὀσμὴ | θανάτου 2 εἰς θάνατον, οἷς ®t Cor. i. 


δὲ ὀσμὴ ῖ ζωῆς 3 εἰς ζωήν, καὶ πρὸς ταῦτα τίς ᾿ἱκανός; 17. οὐ γάρ 
ἐσμεν, ὡς οἱ 3 * πολλοὶ ᾿ καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς “ 


18; Chap. 
iv. 3; 2 
Thess. ii. 
10, etc. 

i Reff. ver. 6, 


ἐξ ™eiduxpwvetas, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ ὡς ἐκ Θεοῦ, κατενώπιον δ tod’ Θεοῦ, * ἐν k Romy. 15, 


" Χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν. 


1 Here only. 


1 oopny DE. 


19, xii. 5; 
1 Cor. x. 


17, 33. 
m κοί i. 12. n Rom. ix. 1; clap aL 19. 


 θανατου . . . ζωης DEGKL, etc.; better εκ θανατον . . . ex ζωης SABC 17 


and the Bohairic. 


3 o. λοιποι DEGL, g and the Syriac vss.; better, as in text, οἱ πολλοι, with 


NABCK, d, e, f, vg. and the Bohairic. 


4G, the Latin and Bohairic vss. omit the second ws. 
5 6, d, e, f, g and the Harclean omit the second aA’, 
δ SScDEGKL have xarevwmiov; better κατέναντι (cf. Rom. iv. 17 and chap. xii. 19) 


with s¢*ABCP 17. 


7 S¢cDbcEGKLP give τον Θεου; better om. του with *ABCD* (cf. xii. 19). 


we are a sweet savour of Christ unto 
God. Not only “through us” is the 
ὀσμή made manifest; we ourselves in so 
far as we realise and manifest our mem- 
bership of Christ are, in fact, that εὐωδία. 
The influence of the lives of the saints is 
sweet and penetrative, like that of in- 
cense. From this verse comes the phrase 
**the odour of sanctity ’.—év τοῖς σωζο- 

ένοις καὶ κιτ.λ.: among them that are 
eing saved and among them that are 
perishing. It is difficult to understand 
why the American Committee of Revisers 
objected to this rendering, and translated 
“are saved... perish”. The force of 
the present participles ought not to be 
overlooked (see reff.) ; men in this world 
are either in the way of life or the way 
of death, but their final destiny is not to 
be spoken of as fixed and irrevocable 
while they are in the flesh. Free will 
involves the possibility alike of falling 
away from a state of grace, or of repent- 
ance from a state of sin. But for men of 
either class is a Christian life lived in 
their midst, a εὐωδία Χριστοῦ. 

Ver. 16. οἷς μὲν ὀσμὴ «.t.A.: to the 
one a savour from death unto death ; to 
the other a savour from life unto life ; 
_ and yet it is the same ὀσμή in both cases; 
cf. Luke ii. 34. ἐκ θανάτου εἰς θάνατον 
may be illustrated by Rom. i. 17, ἐκ 
πίστεως εἰς πίστιν (sce also chap. iii. 18); 
emphasis is gained, according to the 
Hebrew idiom, by repeating the important 
word. The Rabbinical parallels given by 
Wetstein and others show that the meta- 
phor of this verse was common among 
Jewish writers’ they called the Law an 


s 


aroma vitae to the good, but an aroma 
mortis to the evil.—xal πρὸς ταῦτα τίς 
ἱκανός: who then is sufficient for these 
things ? sc., to fill such a part as has been 
just described (for nal... τίς see on 
ver. 2 above). St. Paul’s answer is not 
fully expressed, but the sequence of 
thought is this: “it might be thought 
that no one is sufficient for such a task; 
and yet we are, for we are not as the 
many,” etc.; an answer which he is care- 
ful to explain and qualify in ver. 5 of the 
next chapter, lest he should be accused 
of undue confidence. 

Ver, 17. οὐ γάρ ἐσμεν ὡς x.T.A.: for 
we are not as the many, viz., the ordinary 
teachers with whom you meet. The 
indirect reference is to his opponents at 
Corinth, though they are not named. At 
least he is more worthy to fill the high 
office of which he has been speaking than 
many who would be only too glad to 
usurp his authority; cf. chap. iv. 2, 1 
Thess. ii. 3, 5 for similar comparisons.— 
καπηλεύοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ: who 
adulterate the word of God, i.e., the 
Divine message as revealed in the Gospel 
(the usual sense in the N.T. of ὁ λόγος 
τοῦ Θεοῦ; cf. iv. 2 and 2 Tim. ii. 15). 
κάπηλος (Ecclus. xxvi. 29) is “ta huck- 
ster,’ and is used in Isa. i. 22 of one who 
adulterates wine; so the primary sense of 
καπηλεύειν is “to make merchandise of” 
(R.V. margin), which readily passed into 
“to corrupt” or “‘adulterate” for the 
purposes of trade.— GAN ὡς ἐξ εἶλι- 
κρινείας «.1.A.: but as of sincerity (our 
subjective attitude of mind), but as of 
God (the objective source of our message 


52 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B Ἔν fae 
«Chaps. vy. TTT. 1. "APXOMEOA πάλιν "ἑαυτοὺς" συνιστάνειν; et? μὴ χργζομεν, 
185 ¢f- ὥς ὃ τινες, "συστατικῶν ἐπιστολῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ἢ ἐξ ὑμῶν συστατικῶν; 
awa $, ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἡμῶν ὑμεῖς ἐστε, “eyyeypappérm ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις 


vii. 11. 


bHere only. ἡμῶν,δ γινωσκομένη καὶ ἀναγινωσκομένη ὑπὸ πάντων ἀνθρώπων" 


c Ver. 3; 


Lk. x20 3. “havepodperot ὅτι ἐστὲ ἐπιστολὴ Χριστοῦ διακονηθεῖσα ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν, 


only; 1 


Mace. xiii. ἐγγεγραμμένη © οὐ μέλανι, ἀλλὰ Πνεύματι * Θεοῦ " ζῶντος, οὐκ ἐν 
ἃ Rett. ii. x4. ᾿ πλαξὶ “λιθίναις, ἀλλὰ ἐν " πλαξὶ " καρδίας ἴ ™! σαρκίναις. 


6 Deut. v. 


26: Acts xiv. 15; Rom. ix. 26; chap. vi. 16; ile gu i.g; 1 Tim. iii. 15, en 


Deut. iv. 13, etc g Heb. ix. 4 only. 


1; Heb. 16 only. 


f Exod. xxxi. 18; 


xi. 19, xxxvi. 26. Rom. vii. 14; 1 Cor. iii. 


1 BD* 17 have συνισταν ; FG συνισταναι; all other authorities συνιστανειν. 
2 εἰ μη AKLP; better ἡ μη with $$BCDEG and the primary vss, 


5 AD* have wowrep. 


« D*EGKLP, d, e, g and the Syriac have συστατικων (G, g add επιστολων) ; 
better om. with S$ABC 17 and the Bohairic. 


5 $8 17 have καρδιαις υμων. 


6 B 67**, f, vg. have καὶ eyyeyp. 


7 FK and most vss. support καρδιας ; better καρδιαῖς with SABCDEGLP and 
the Harclean. W.H. suggest that the second πλαξι was introduced through a 


primitive clerical error. 


and of our commission to speak), in the 
sight of God (sc., in the consciousness of 
His presence ; cf. ver. 10 above), speak we 
in Christ, sc., as members of Christ's 
Body, in fellowship with Him. This 
solemn and impressive confirmation of 
what has been said is repeated, chap. xii. 
19, κατέναντι Θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ λαλοῦμεν. 

CuaPTerR III.—Vv. 1-3. THE Cor- 
INTHIANS ARE 51. PAUL’s “ EPISTLE OF 
COMMENDATION ”.—Ver. I. ἀρχόμεθα 
πάλιν ἑαυτοὺς συνιστ. : are we beginning 
again (sc., as, for instance, in 1 Cor. ix. 
15, xiv. 18, xv. 10, or possibly he alludes 
to i. 12 above; cf. chap. v. 12, x. 18 
below) to commend ourselves ? His oppo- 
nents seem to have made this charge, 
which he is careful to repudiate again (x. 
12; cf. xii, 11) The phrase éavrov 
συνιστάνειν (or συνιστάναι, for both 
forms occur) is found four times in this 
Epistle (see reff.), and always in a bad 
sense, the prominent place of éavrév sig- 
nifying that there has been undue egotism; 
on the other hand, συνιστάνειν ἑαυτὸν, 
which occurs three times (see reff.), is 
always used in a good sense, of that legi- 
timate commendation of himself and his 
message which every faithful minister will 
adopt. Neither form occurs elsewhere in 
the N.T. (unless Gal, ii, 18, παραβάτην 
ἐμαυτὸν συνιστάνω, be regarded as an 
exception).— ph χρήζομεν «.7.A.: or do 
we need, as some do (i,é., the ot πολλοί 
of ii. 17; τινες is his usual vague descrip- 
tion of opponents; see 1 Cor, iv. 18, 


xv. 12, chap. x. 2, Gal. i. 7, x Tim. i. 
3, 19), epistles of commendation to you or 


from you? Greek teachers used to give 


ἐπιστολαὶ συστατικαί (Diogenes Laert., 
viii. 87) ; for such commendatory mention 
cf. Acts xv. 25 (of Judas and Silas to the 
Church at Antioch), Acts xviii. 27 (ot 
Apollos to the Church at Corinth), Rom. 
xvi. I (of Phoebe to the Churchat Rome), 
chap. viii. 16-24 (of Titus and his com- 
panions to the Church at Corinth); cf. 
also 1 Cor. xvi. 3. St. Paul scouts the 
idea that he, who first brought the Gospel 
to Corinth, should need to present formal 
credentials to the Corinthian Church; 
and it would be equally anomalous that 
he should seek recommendations from 
them (ἐξ ὑμῶν). He has testimonies to 
his character and office far superior to 
any that could be written on papyrus. 
These can be pointed to if any object 
that his Apostolic office was self-assumed, 
and that he delivers the Gospel message 
in his own way and on his own authority 
(Gal. i. 12). 

Ver. 2. ἡἧ ἐπιστολὴ ἡμῶν «7A. ὁ δι 
are our epistle. They are his credentials. 
o 1 Cor, ix. 2, where he tells them that 

ey are the “seal” of his apostleship. 
Note the emphasis laid on ἐπιστολή by its 

osition in the sentence.—éyyeypappévy 
ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν : written in our 
hearts, i.¢., in the heart of me, Paul (cf. 
vii. 3); a somewhat unexpected, and, as 
it were, parenthetic application of the 
metaphor, suggested by the memory of 


΄ 


eS ee δον Δ 


ee er, 


a. le 

















1—6. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


53 


k Reff. i. 15. 


4. " Πεποΐθησιν δὲ τοιαύτην exopev* διὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ πρὸς τὸν FG tS 
Θεόν" 5. οὐχ ὅτι ᾿ἱκανοί ἐσμεν ἀφ᾽ 2 ἑαυτῶν λογίσασθαί ὃ τι,’ ὡς ὅ τὰ Here 


only. 


ἐξ ἑαυτῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ ™ixavdrns ἡμῶν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ, 6. ὃς καὶ "ἱκάνωσεν 2 Col. i. 12 
ἡμᾶς " διακόνους ἢ καινῆς " διαθήκης, οὐ *ypdpparos,’ ἀλλὰ * πνεύ- ο C/. Eph. 


p Mt. xxvi. 28; Lk. xxii. 20; 1 Cor. xi. 25; Heb. viii. 8 (Jer. xxxi. 31), ix. 15. 


1 Α has εχω. 


ili. 7; Col. 
i. 23. 
q Rom. ii. 29, vii. 6. 


2 adh eavtwv is placed as in text by KL and the Harclean, and after λογισασθαι τι 
by ADEGP and the Latins; its true place is before uxavor ἐσμεν with Ὁ ΒΟ 73 and 
the Bohairic; 17 and the Peshitto omit ad’ εαυτων altogether, 


3 CDEG give λογιΐζεσθαι for λογισασθαι of HABKLP. 
4B om. τι ; P has the order τι AoyiLeo Gar. 


5 C om. ὡς as unnecessary for the sense. 


6 αὐτων BG for εαντων. 


717 has ov γραμματι adAa πνευματι, which the Latin vss. follow. 


his labours among them which had left fi 


an indelible impression upon his heart.— 
γινωσκ. καὶ ἀναγινωσκ. «.T.A.: known 
and read of all men, This is the legiti- 
mate application of the metaphor, and is 
expanded in the next verse. The letter 
written on St. Paul’s heart was not 
open to the world; but the letter written 
on the heart of the Corinthians by Christ 
through St. Paul’s ministry was patent 
to the world’s observation, as it was re- 
flected in their Christian mode of life. 
Facts speak louder than words. For the 
jingle yweoKo +++ ἀναγινωσκομένη 
cf. Acts viii. 30, Reig ὃ ἀναγινώσ- 
κεις, and see the note on i. 13 above. 

Ver. 3. φανερούμενοι ὅτι ἐστὲ κ.τ.λ.: 
being made manifest that ye are an epistle 
of Christ (sc., written by Christ), minis- 
tered by us (the Apostle conceiving of 
himself as his Master’s amanuensis).— 
ἐγγεγραμμένη οὐ μέλανι κ-.τ.λ.: written 
not with ink, but with the Spirit o the 
living God ; not in tables of stone but in 
tables that are hearts of flesh. This 
“writing”? which the Corinthians ex- 
hibit is no writing with ink on a papyrus 
roll, but is the mystical imprint of the 
Divine Spirit in their hearts, conveyed 
through Paul’s ministrations; cf. Jer. 
Xxxi. 33, Prov. vii.3. And this leads him 
to think of the ancient ‘‘ writing” of 
the Law by the “finger of God” on the 
Twelve Tables, and to contrast it with 
this epistle of Christ on tables that are 
not of stone but are “ hearts of flesh” 
(see reff.). For σάρκινος (cf. λίθινος, 
ὀστράκινος) see on i. 12 above. 

Vv. 4-6. Hts success IN THE MINIs- 
TRY OF THE NEw COVENANT IS ALTO- 
GETHER DUE TO Gop.—Ver. 4. πεποί- 
θησιν δὲ τοιαύτην K.7.A.: and such con- 


dence have we through Christ towards 
God (cf. Rom. iv. 2, v. 1 for a like use of 
πρὸς Tov Θεόν). That is ‘we are suffi- 
cient for these things”’ (see ii. 16, 17); 
but he hastens to explain the true source 
of his confidence. 

Ver. 5. ὅτι ἱκανοί «.7.A.: not 
that we are sufficient of ourselves to judge 
anything as from ourselves ; sc., to judge 
rightly of the methods to be followed in 
the discharge of the Apostolic ministry ; 
there is no thought here of the natural 
depravity of man, or the like. For the 
constr. οὐχ ὅτι . .- cf. i. 24 and reff. 
λογίζεσθαι is here used in its widest 
sense of carrying on any of the ordinary 
processes of reasoning (cf. x. 7, xii. 6). 
The repetition ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτῶν . .. ἐξ ἑαυτῶν 
emphasises the statement of the need of 
God’s grace. St. Paul’s habit of dwell- 
ing on a word and coming back to it 
again and again (an artifice which the 
Latin rhetoricians called traductio) is 
well illustrated in this passage. We 
have ἱκανοί, ἱκανότης, ἱκάνωσεν ; ypap- 

a (following ἐγγεγραμμένη in ver. 2) ; 
ιακονηθεῖσα, διάκονος, διακονία ; and 
δόξα eight times between vv. 7-11. With 
the sentiment 4 ἱκανότης ἡμῶν ἐκ τοῦ 
Θεοῦ, cf. 1 Cor. xv. 10 and chap. xii. 9. 

Ver. 6. ὃς καὶ ἱκάνωσεν κ-.τ.λ. : who 
also (‘qui idem”; cf. 1 Cor. i. 8) made 
us sufficient as ministers of the New 
Covenant—[ministers] not of the letter 
cae the Law), but of the Spirit ; for the 
etter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. 
The Apostle’s opponents at Corinth were 
probably Judaisers (xi. 22), and thus the 
description of his office as the διακονία 
καινῆς διαθήκης leads him to a compari- 
son and a contrast of the Old Covenant 


and the New. The “covenants” (Rom. 


54 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B III. 


ry yi. ματος τὸ γὰρ γράμμα ἀποκτείνει,; τὸ δὲ "πνεῦμα "Lwomoret. 7. 
vill. 113 Tf δὲ ἡ διακονία τοῦ θανάτου ἐν γράμμασιν,2 " ἐντετυπωμένη ἐν ὅ 


Cor. xv. 


5; of-1 λίθοις, ἐγενήθη ἐν δόξῃ, ᾿ ὥστε μὴ δύνασθαι ἃ ἀτενίσαι τοὺς υἱοὺς 


et. iii. 18 


and Rom. Ἰσραὴλ “eis τὸ πρόσωπον Μωσέως “ διὰ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ προσώπου 


viii. 10. 
s Here only. 
t Exod. xxxiv. 29-35- 


u Acts L το, fii. 4, vi. 15, vil. 55, xi. 6, xfii. 9. 


1B has awoxrever; but NGKP 17 have απόοκτεννει, and ACDEL amoxteva; 


Lachmann conjectured amoxratvet. 


2 BD*G and the Peshitto have γραμματι. 
3 KecDbcEKL, d, e, f support ev λιθοις ; om. ev N*ABCD*GP 17, g. 
4 The more accurate spelling is Mevoews (NBCGKL, etc.) ; and so at vv. 13, 15. 


ix. 4, Eph. ii. 12) between Jehovah and 
Israel were the foundation of Judaism. 
They began (not to speak of the Covenant 
with Noah) with the Covenant of Circum- 
cision granted to Abraham (Gen. xvii. 2) 
and repeated more than once (Gen. xxii. 
16, xxvi. 3), which is often appealed to in 
the N.T. (Luke i. 72, Acts iii, 25, vii. 8, 
etc.). This was not abrogated (Gal. iii. 
17) by the Covenant of Sinai (Exod. xix. 
5; cf. for its recapitulation in Moab, 
Deut. xxix. 1), which, as the National 
Charter of Israel, was pre-eminently to 
a Hebrew “tthe Old Covenant”. The 

eat prophecy of a Deliverer from Zion 
Isa. lix. 21) is interpreted by St. Paul 
Rom. xi. 27) as the ‘‘covenant” of 
which the prophet spoke in the next 
verse ; and Jeremiah, in a ot (xxxi. 
31-33) from which the Apostle has just 
now (ver. 3 above) borrowed a striking 
image, had proclaimed a New Covenant 
with Israel in the future. The phrase 
had been consecrated to the Gospel, 
through its employment by Christ at the 
Institution of the Eucharist (Matt. xxvi. 
28, Luke xxii. 20, 1 Cor. xi. 25); and in 
that solemn context it bore direct allusion 
to the Blood of Sprinkling which ratified 
the Old Covenant of Sinai (Exod. xxiv. 
8). Itis of this ‘‘ New Covenant” that 
St. Paul is a διάκονος (Christ is its μεσί- 
της, Heb. ix. 15); #.¢., he is a διάκονος 
οὐ γράμματος ἀλλὰ πνεύματος, not of 
the letter of the Law (as might be 
wrongly inferred from his statement in 
ver. 3 that the ἐπιστολὴ Χριστοῦ was 
“ ministered "[διακονηθεῖσα] by him), but 
of the “‘ Spirit of the living God” (ver. 3). 
This is a much more gracious διακονία, 
inasmuch as the Law is the instrument of 
Death (ef. Rom. v. 20, vii. 9, viii. 2, in all 
which passages the Apostle brings into 
closest connexion the three thoughts of 
the Law, Sin, and Death), but the Spirit 
of God is the Giver of Life (see reff. and 


cf. Gal. iii. 21, where he notes that the 
law is not able, ζωοποιεῖν, ‘ to give life ”). 
It will be observed that the article is 
wanting before καινῆς διαθήκης, as it is 
before γράμματος and πνεύματος ; but 
we pv | not on that account with the 
Revisers translate "ὦ new covenant”. 
The expression ‘* New Covenant,” like 
the words “ Letter”’ (for the Law) and 
‘*Spirit” for the Holy Spirit, was a 
technical phrase in the theology of the 
day; and so might well dispense with the 
article. The contrast between ‘ letter” 
and “Spirit” here (so often misunder- 
stood, as if it pointed to a contrast be- 
tween what is verbally stated and what 
is really implied, and so justified an appeal 
from the bare “letter” of the law to the 
principles on which it rests) is exactly 
illustrated by Rom. vii. 6, where St. Paul 
declares that the service of a Christian 
is ἐν καινότητι πνεύματος καὶ οὐ παλαιό- 
THTL γράμματος, ἱ.6.. “in newness of the 
Spirit and not in oldness of the letter”. 
And (though not so plainly) the same 
contrast is probably intended in Rom. ii. 
29. InSt. Paul’s writings πνεῦμα, when 
used for the human spirit, is contrasted 
with σῶμα (x Cor. v. 3), σάρξ (2 Cor. vii. 
1) and νοῦς (x Cor. xiv. 14), but never 
with γράμμα. This is a technical term 
for the “ Law” (like γραφή, Scripture; 
cf. ver. 7, ἐν γράμμασιν), and is proper! 
set over against the “Spirit” of G 
whose office and work were first plainly 
revealed in the Gospel. 

Vv. 7-11. DIGRESSION ON THE MINIs- 
TRY OF THE NEw Covenant. If 18 (a) 
MORE GLORIOUS THAN THAT OF THE OLD. 
—Ver. 7. εἰ δὲ ἡ διακονία κιτ.λ.: καρ κα 
the Ministration of Death (see ver. 6), 
written, and engraven in stones, came 
into existence in glory, etc. The refer- 
ence is to the glory on the face of Moses 
(see reff.) when the Tables of the Law 
were brought down from Mount Sinai, 





ea Mi sats a 
Pet ne eed τα πο 








7—11. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS 8 


55 


αὐτοῦ τὴν καταργουμένην, 8. πῶς οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἡ διακονία τοῦ ¥ Chap. vii. 


πνεύματος ἔσται ἐν δόξῃ ; 9. εἰ γὰρ ἡ ' διακονία τῆς “ κατακρίσεως ¥ 
δόξα," “ πολλῷ “μᾶλλον περισσεύει ὃ ἡ διακονία τῆς διακαιοσύνης 


év* δόξῃ. 


"τούτῳ τῷ * μέρει, ἕνεκεν ὅ τῆς " ὑπερβαλλούσης δόξης. 


only. 

om, ν. 9, 
10; 1 Cor, 
xii. 22; 
Phil. i. 23, 


10. καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲ ὅ δεδόξασται τὸ δεδοξασμένον *éy ii. 12 an 


ver. II. 


11. εἰ γὰρ Χ ot ah Cok 


τὸ καταργούμενον διὰ δόξης, "πολλῷ "μᾶλλον τὸ μένον ἐν δόξῃ. ii. 16. 


14; Eph. i. 10, ii. 7, iii. 19 only; 2 Macc. iv. 13. 


1 BDbEKLP, f, g and the Bohairic support ἡ Stax. ; Ty διακον 
The external evidence is thus evenly balanced, but the 


d, e and the Syriac vss. 


Chap. ix. 
z Reff. ver. 9. 


NACD*G 17, 


form of the sentence inclines us to the received text. 


2 D*EG supply ἐστιν after Sofa. 


5 DE, d, e, g and the Syriac vss. give περισσευσει. 
*SScDEGKLP support ev δοξῃ; δ ABC omit ev. 
5 Only a few cursives (and d, e, f, g) support οὐδε; all uncials and the Bohairic 


have ov. 


5 For ἕνεκεν read e.vexey with NABDEGP. 


St. Paul argues that for two reasons the 
glory of the New Covenant is greater, 
(i.) the former διακονία was one of con- 
demnation, the latter of righteousness 
(ver. 9), and (ii.) the glory of the former 
was only a transient gleam, while that 
of the latter abides for ever (ver. 11). 
Of the first Tables which Moses broke 
in anger it is said that the bag, θη τ 

αφὴ Θεοῦ κεκολαμμένη ἐν τοῖς πλαξίν 
Exod. xxxii. 16) ; it is merely said of the 
second Tables that Moses wrote upon 
them ‘the words of the Covenant, the 
Ten Commandments” (Exod. xxxiv. 28). 
Nevertheless the tradition (see Philo, Vit. 
Mos., iii., 2) was that the second Tables, 
like the first, were not only “ written” 
but “ engraven” (ἐντετυπωμένη), as the 
Apostle has it.—dorre μὴ δύνασθαι x.7.A. : 
so that the Children of Israel could not 
(sc., through fear, Exod. xxxiv. 30) look 
steadfastly upon the face of Moses on 
account of the glory of his face, transient 
asit was, καταργεῖσθαι is nearly always, 
if not always (for 1 Cor. ii. 6 is doubtful), 
passive in St. Paul (Rom. vi. 6, vii. 2, 1 
Cor. xiii. 8, xv. 26, Gal. v. 4), and as it 
must be taken passively in ver. 14 below, 
there is a good deal to be said for re- 
garding it as passive here and in νυ. 11, 
13 (as the A.V. does; note, however, that 
the translation “" which was to be done 
away” in this verse is wrong). Yet the 
sense seems to require the middle voice 
“which was passing away,” sc., even as 
he spoke to the people. The position of 
τὴν καταργουμένην gives it emphasis. 
Pfleiderer is guilty of the extravagant 
supposition that the whole story of the 





Transfiguration (cf. Luke ix. 28 ff.) is 
built up on the basis of this passage (cf. 
μεταμορφούμεθα, ver. 18), the disappear- 
ance of Moses and Elijah, leaving Jesus 
alone with His disciples, indicating that 
the glory of the Old Covenant was pass- 
ing away (καταργουμένην) ! 

Vv. 8, 9. πῶς οὐχὶ μᾶλλον κι.οτ.λ.: 
how shall not rather the Ministration of 
the Spirit be with glory? For if the 
Ministration of Condemnation be glory 
(if we read τῇ διακονίᾳ we must render, 
with the American Revisers,‘‘has glory”), 
much rather doth the Ministration of 
Righteousness exceed in glory. %. Rom. 
v. 16, Td μὲν yap κρίμα ἐξ ἑνὸς εἰς 
κατάκριμα, τὸ άρισμα ἐκ πολλῶν 
παραπτωμάτων εἰς Meautnnes and 
Rom. viii. 1, οὐδὲν yap viv κατάκριμα 
τοῖς ἐν Xp. "In. The phrase διάκονοι 
δικαιοσύνης is used again at xi. 15, as 
descriptive of the ministers of the New 
Covenant; it is an essential point of 
Pauline theology that “righteousness ” 
is not of the “law” (Gal. ili. 21). The 
argument is a minori ad majus. 

er. 10. Kal yap οὐ δεδόξασται : for 
that which hath been made glorious, sc., 
the Ministration of the Old Covenant, 
hath not [really] been made glorious in 
this respect, viz., on account of the sur- 
assing glory (of the Ministration of the 
ew Covenant) ; #.e., the surpassing glory 
of the second made the glory of the first 
seem nought. The phraseology of Exod. 
XXxiv. 35 πρόσωπον Μωσῆ - + « 
δεδόξασται) is still in the Apostle’s mind. 
ἐν τούτῳ τῷ μέρει has been otherwise 
explained as equivalent to ‘in this in- 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B ΠῚ, 


56 
go gy 12. ἔχοντες οὖν τοιαύτην ἐλπίδα, πολλῇ "παρρησίᾳ χρώμεθα 13. 
i. 12, vi καὶ οὐ καθάπερ "Μωσῆς ἐτίθει “κάλυμμα ἐπὶ τὸ "πρόσωπον éautod,} 
i 20 ; Col. πρὸς τὸ μὴ “ ἀτενίσαι τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ “ εἰς τὸ 3 τέλος ὃ τοῦ καταρ- 
Tim. iii younévou 14. ἀλλ᾽ " ἐπωρώθη τὰ ‘vonpata αὐτῶν ἄχρι γὰρ τῆς 
b Exod Me ojpepov* τὸ αὐτὸ κάλυμμα ἐπὶ" τῇ Sdvayvdoe τῆς " παλαιᾶς 
“τ᾿ διαθήκης μένει ph '᾿ἀνακαλυπτόμενον, ὅ τι ἐν Χριστῷ καταργεῖται" 


5, 
ς flere only. e Mk. vi. 52, viii. 17; John xii. πιὰ Rom. xi. 7 only. f Reff. ii. 11. 


ff. . J A é 
3 ait Aen Tim. iv. 13 only; Neh. viii. 8. h Here only. i Ver. 18 only; cf. Job xii. 22. 


1 \§DEK support eavrov; better αὐτου ABCGLP 17. (Yet B has eavrov, Exod. 


XXxxiv. 35.) 
2 D*G om. To before τελος. 


3 A, f have προσωπον for τελος (a manifest error due to the προσωπον in the line 


before). 


4 Better onpepov npepas (cf. Acts xx. 26, Rom. xi. 8) with $ABCDEGP and most 
vss.; the received text in omitting npepas follows KL and the Peshitto. 


5 DEG have ev for em. 


stance of Moses”; but it seems (see 
ref.) to be merely a redundant phrase, 
added for the sake of emphasis, intro- 
ducing ἕνεκεν τῆς ὕπερβ. δόξ. 

Ver. 11. εἰ γὰρ τὸ καταργ. K.T.A.: 
for if that which passes away was with 
glory, much more that which abtdeth ἐς 
in glory. The difference of prepositions 
διὰ δόξης . . . ἐν δόξῃ should not be 
overlooked; the Ministration of the Old 
Covenant was only with a transient flush 
of glory, that of the New abides in glory 
(cf. esp. Heb. xii. 18-27). It is true that 
St. Paul sometimes changes his pre- 
positions in cases where we find difficult 
to assign a sufficient reason (e.g., διά and 
ἐκ, Rom. iii. 30, Gal. ii. 16); but that is 
no reason for confusing the force of διὰ 
and ἐν, when the preservation of the 
distinction between them adds point to 
the passage (cf. Rom. v. το, where διὰ 
and ἐν are again confused in the A.V.). 
See further on vi. 8, 

Vv, 12-18. THe MINISTRY OF THE 
New Covenant 18 (δ) OPEN, NOT 
VEILED, AS WAS THAT OF THE OLD. 
The illustration from the O.T. which is 
used in these verses has been obscured 
for English readers by the faulty render- 
ing of the A.V. in Exod. xxxiv. 33. It 
would appear from that rendering, viz., 
“till Moses had done speaking with 
them he put a veil on his face,” that the 
object of the veil was to conceal from the 
people the Divine glory reflected in his 
face. But this is to misrepresent the 
original Hebrew, and is not the rendering 
given either by the LXX or by modern 
scholars. The R.V substitutes when for 


6 τι should be written ott, as by Tisch. and W.H. 


till in the verse just quoted, thus bringing 
out the point that the veil was used to 
conceal not the glory on the face of 
Moses, but its evanescence ; it was fading 
even while he spoke, and this by his use 
of the veil he prevented the people from 
perceiving. When he “went in unto the 
Lord” again he took the veil off. The 
Apostle applies all this to the Israel of his 


day. Stilla veil is between them and the 


Divine glory—a veil “‘ upon their hearts” 
which prevents them from seeing the 
transitoriness of the Old Covenant; yet, 
as it was of old, if they turn to the Lord, 
the veil is removed, and an open vision 
is granted. St. Paul is fond of such alle- 
gorisings of the history of the Exodus; cf, 
¢.g., I Cor. x. 2, Gal. iv. 25. 

Ver. 12. ἔχοντες οὖν τοιαύτην κ-.τ.λ.: 
having therefore such a hope (sc., of the 
glorious Ministration of the Spirit, ver. 8; 
cf. vet. 4) we use great boldness of speech. 
The verses which follow are parentheti- 
cal down to ver. 18, where the subject is 
again we, i.e., all Christian believers, as 
contrasted with Jews. 

Ver. 13. καὶ οὐ καθάπερ x.t.A.: and 
(we put no veil upon our face) as Moses 
put a veil upon his face, The construc- 
tion is broken, but the sense is obvious; 
cf., for a somewhat similar abbreviation, 
Mark xv. 8, ὁ ὄχλος ἤρξατο αἰτεῖσθαι 
καθὼς ἐποίει αὐτοῖς.--πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἀτενί- 
σαι κιτιλ.; to the end that the children 
of Israel should not look steadfastly on 
the end of that which was passing away, 
sc., the evanescence of the glory on 
Moses’ face. The A.V., “could not 
steadfastly look to the end of that which 








12—17. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


57 


15. ἀλλ᾽ "ἕως " σήμερον, yvixa! ἀναγινώσκεται 5 Μωσῆς, κάλυμμα k Ecclus. 


ἐπὶ thy καρδίαν αὐτῶν κεῖται 16. ' ἡνίκα δ᾽ ὁ ἂν ™ ἐπιστρέψῃ πρὸς 


Κύριον, '᾿ περιαιρεῖται τὸ |‘ κάλυμμα. 


xvii. 7; 
Matt. 

od ase Ὁ xxvii. 8; 
17. ὃ δὲ Κύριος τὸ Πνεῦμά ap 


xxxiv. 34. m Exod, xxxiv. 31. 


1DEGKLP support ἡνικα avayw.; better nvixa av αναγιν. with SABC 17. 
2 GKL support ἀναγινωσκεται ; better ἀαναγινωσκηται with SABCDEP, 
3 D*EG, the Latins and the Bohairic place keira: before emt τὴν καρδιαν αὐτων. 


4 $$cBDEGKLP support δ᾽ av; but $§*A 17 give Se eav. 


was abolished,” evidently takes τέλος 
as standing for Christ, the fulfilment of 
the Mosaic law (Rom. x. 4). But this is 
not suitable tothe context. πρὸς τό with 
an infinitive is sometimes found to express 
the aim or intention (never the mere re- 
sult), as, ¢.g., Eph. vi. 11, 1 Thess. ii. 9, 
2 Thess. iii. 8. 

Ver. 14. ἀλλ᾽’ ἐπωρώθη τὰ νοήματα 
αὐτῶν : but their minds were blinded, 
$c., in reference to what they saw (cf. 
Rom. xi. 25); they took the brightness 
for an abiding glory (cf. Deut. xxix. 4). 
mw@pos, which primarily means a kind of 
marble, came to mean, in medical writers, 
a hardening of the tissues; and hence we 
have πωρόω, (1) to petrify, (2) to become 
insensible or obtuse, and so (3) it comes 
to be used of insensibility of the organs 
of vision, to blind. (See J. A. Robinson 
in ¥ournal of Theological Studies, Oct., 
1gol, and cf, reff. above.)—&xpt yap τῆς 
σήμερον ἡμέρας «.7.A.: for until this very 
day at the reading of the Old Covenant the 
same veil remaineth unlifted ( for it is only 
done away in Christ). (1) Some com- 
mentators take μὴ ἀνακαλυπτόμενον as a 
nominative absolute, and translate ‘the 
same veil remaineth, it not being revealed 
that it (sc., either the veil or the Old 
Covenant) is done away in Christ”. But 
the order of the words seems to force us 
to take the present participle with μένει 
—it having a merely explanatory force 
and being almost redundant. (2) Again 
both A.V. and R.V. (text), while trans- 
lating the first part of the clause as we 
have done, render ὅ τι ἐν Xp. καταργεῖται 
“‘which veil is done away in Christ”’. 
But it seems indefensible thus to take 8 
τι as equivalent to 8. (3) Field arrives 
at yet another rendering by taking κάλυμ- 
pa per synecdochem for the thing veiled, 
which is here declared to be the fact that 
the Old Covenant is done away in Christ. 
Herenders ‘‘ the same mystery remaineth 
unrevealed, zamely, that it is done away 
in Christ”. But it is a grave objection 


C omits ay. 


to this that τὸ κάλυμμα has to be taken 
in a sense different from that which it has 
all through the rest of the passage. (4) 
We prefer, therefore (with Schmiedel and 
Schnedermann), to read ὅ τι as ὅτι, for, 
and to regard the phrase ὅτι ἐν Xp. 
καταργεῖται as parenthetical: ‘ until this 
day the veil remains unlifted (for it is 
only in Christ that it is done away)”; 
t.¢., the Jews do not recognise the vanish- 
ing away of the glory of the Law, which 
yet is going on before their eyes. How 
completely Judaism was dissociated in 
St. Paul’s mind from Christianity is plain 
from the striking phrase ἡ παλαιὰ διαθήκη 
(here only found; but cf. ver. 6), by 
which he describes the religious system 
of his own early manhood, which had 
only been superseded by ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη 
thirty years before he wrote this letter. 
ἀνάγνωσις is (see reff.) the public reading 
of the Law in the synagogues; it seems, 
however, unnecessarily ingenious to see 
here, with Schmiedel, an allusion in τὸ 
κάλυμμα to the covers in which the 
Synagogue Rolls were preserved. 

Ver. 15. ἀλλ᾽ ἕως σήμερον κ.Ῥτιλ.: 
but unto this day, whensoever Moses (sc., 
the Law; cf. Acts xv. 21) is read, a veil 
lieth upon their heart. It will be observed 
that the image has been changed as the 
application of Exod. xxxiv. 29 ff. pro- 
ceeds: in that history the veil was upon 
the face of Moses; here it is upon the 
heart of the people, as God speaks to 
them through the medium of the Law 
(see above on ver. 2 for a similar change 
in the application of the metaphor sug- 
gested by the word ἐπιστολή). 

Ver. 16. ἡνίκα δ᾽ ἂν κιτιλ.: but 
whensoever it, i.e., Israel, shall turn to 
the Lord, the veil is taken away ; a para- 
phrase of Exod. xxxiv. 34, ἡνίκα δ᾽ ἂν 
εἰσεπορεύετο Μωσῆς ἔναντι Κυρίου λα- 
λεῖν αὐτῷ, περιῃρεῖτο τὸ κάλυμμα ἕως 
τοῦ ἐκπορεύεσθαι. 

Ver. 17. δδὲ Κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν: 
but the LorD, t.e., the Jehovah of Israel, 


58 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYE B IL, 1 
nx Kings ἐστιν" οὗ δὲ τὸ " Πνεῦμα " Kupiou,! ἐκεῖ 3 " ἐλευθερίαᾳ. 18. ἡμεῖς δὲ 
2 Kings πάντες, » ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπῳ τὴν “δόξαν Κυρίου * κατοπτριζό- 
καί, 1 (LE μένοι, τὴν αὐτὴν "εἰκόνα " μεταμορφούμεθα ® ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν, 
oat βίῃ o Rom. viii. 2x; 1 Cor. x. 29; Gal. ii. ace I, 1% p Reff. ver. 14. Cf. Exed. 


xxxill. 19. r Here ὑπ ἐς 
om. 


t Matt. xvii. a; Mk. ix. 2; xii. 2 only. 


s Rom. viii. a9; x 


q 
. xi. 7, xv. 49; chap. iv. 4; Col. i. 15, iii. 10. 


1 L has τὸ αγιον instead of Κυριου, and two cursives omit Κυριου. Hort suggested 
that Kuptov is a primitive error for Κυριον; but this seems quite unnecessary; see 


note below and reff. 


2 Om. exes NABCD* 17, r, the Peshitto and the Bohairic; it is thus inadequately 
supported and, moreover, is not in St. Paul’s style (cf. Rom. iv. 15, v. 20). 


3 A perapopdpoupevor. 


spoken of in the preceding quotation, 
is the Spirit, the Author of the New 
Covenant of grace, to whom the new 
Israel is invited to turn (cf. Acts ix. 35). 
It is quite perverse to compare 1 Cor. 
xv. 45 (where it is said that Christ, as 
“the last Adam,” became πνεῦμα ζωο- 
ποιοῦν) or Ignatius, Mag.,§ 15, ἀδιάκριτον 
πνεῦμα ὅς ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός, and to 
find here an “ identification” of Christ 
with the Holy Spirit. ὁ Κύριος is here 
not Christ, but the Jehovah of Israel 
spoken of in Exod, xxxiv. 34; and in St. 
Paul’s application of the narrative of the 
Veiling of Moses, the counterpart of 6 


Κύριος under the New Covenant is the. 


Spirit, which has been already contrasted 
in the preceding verses (vv. 3, 6) with 
the letter of the Mosaic law. At the 
same time it is true that the identifica- 
tion of “the Lord” (i.¢., the Son) and 
“the Spirit” intermittently appears 
afterwards in Christian theology. See 
(for reff.) Swete in Dict. Chr. Btog., iii., 
115a.—ob} δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα κιτιλ.: and 
where the Spirit of the Lord is, there ἐς 
liberty ; sc., in contradistinction to the 
servile fear of Exod. xxxiv. 30; cf. John 
viii. 32, Rom. viii. 15, Gal. iv. 7, in all of 
which passages the freedom of Christian 
service is contrasted with the bondage of 
the Law. The thought here is not of 
the freedom of the Spirit’s action (John 
iii, 8, x Cor. xii. 11), but of the freedom 
of access to God under the New Cove- 
nant, as exemplified in the removal of 
the veil, when the soul turns itself to the 
Divine glory. ‘‘ The Spirit of the Lord” 
is an O.T. phrase (see σε). We now 
return to the thought of ver. 12, the 
openness and boldness of the Apostolical 
service. 

Ver. 18. ἡμεῖς δὲ πάντες κιτιλ.: but 
we all, sc., you as well as I, all Christian 
believers, with unveiled face (and so not 


as Moses under the Old Covenant), re- 
Jlecting as a mirror the glory o. the Lord, 
sc., of Jehovah (see reff.), which is the 
glory of Christ (cf. John xvii. 24), are 
transformed into the same image, sc., of 
Christ (see reff.), from glory to glory (ἷ.6.» 


a echo and without interruption, 
and so unlike the transitory refiection 





= 


[9] ry 9 
€ Vivine giory on e face oO OSES 5 





n 
‘glory is continuous, as becomes the Work 
of the Spirit from whom it springs (John 
xvi. 14, Rom. viii. 11). The meaning of 
κατοπτρίζεσθαι (which is not found else- 
where in the Greek Bible) is somewhat 
doubtful. (i.) The analogy of 1 Cor. xiii. 
12, of Philo, Leg. All., iii., 33 (a passage 
where Exod. xxxiii. 18 is paraphr 

and which therefore is specially apposite 
here), and of Clem. Rom., § 36, would 
support the rendering of the A.V., “ be- 
holding as in a glass” (¢.¢., a mirror). 
This is also given in the margin of the 
R.V., and is preferred by the American 
Revisers. But such a translation is 
not appropriate to the context, for the 
Apostle’s thought is not of any indirect 
vision of the Divine glory, but of our 
freedom of access thereto and of per- 
ception thereof. It seems better there- 
fore (ii.) to render with the R.V. (follow- 
ing Chrysostom) reflecting as in a mirror. 
And so the image conveyed is “ that 
Christians having, like Moses, received 
in their lives the reflected glory of the 
Divine presence, as Moses received it on 
his countenance, are unlike Moses in 
that they have no fear, such as his, of 
its vanishing away, but are confident of 
its continuing to shine in them with 
increasing lustre (cf. iv. 6 below); and 
in this confidence present themselves 
without veil or disguise, inviting enquiry 





ee . δ ω 








IV. I—3. 


καθάπερ' ἀπὸ Κυρίου Πνεύματος. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 59 


IV. 1. Διὰ τοῦτο ἔχοντες thy * Lk xviii 
διακονίαν ταύτην, καθὼς ἠλεήθημεν, οὐκ "ἐκκακοῦμεν,32 2. ἀλλ᾽ "ἀπει- 


υἱ 9; Eph. 
iii. 13; 2 


πάμεθα τὰ " κρυπτὰ τῆς “αἰσχύνης, μὴ " περιπατοῦντες " ἐν ‘ravoupyia, Thess. iii, 


13; and 


μηδὲ “δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ TH " φανερώσει τῆς ver. 16. 


b Here only, 


le 81 a k a 5 ob x. 3. 
ἀληθείας * συνιστῶντες * ᾿ ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς πᾶσαν ἢ συνείδησιν ἀνθρώπων Beas 


‘évdmov τοῦ ' Θεοῦ. 3. ei δὲ " καὶ ἔστι κεκαλυμμένον τὸ " eday- 1 πος 


d Phil. iii. 19; Jude 13; cf. Rom. vi. a1; Eph. v. 12. 
f Chap. xi. 3; 1 Cor. iii. igi Eph. iv. 14; οἵ, chap. xii. 16. 


25; 1 Pet. iii. 4. 

om. vi. 4; Eph. v. 2; Col. iii. 7, etc. 

g Here only ; Ps. xiv. 3, xxxv. 3. 
x. 12, 18. k Reff. i. 12. 

rf of, chap. viii. ar. 


1B has καθωσπερ. 


h 1 Cor. xii. 7 only. 
1 Rom. xiv. 22; chap. vii. 12; Gal. i.a0; 1 Tim v. 4, 21; 2 Tim. iv. 
m 1 Cor. iv. 7; cf. chap. iv. 16, νυ. 16, vii. δ, 
14; οἵ. Rom. ii. 16, xvi. 25; 1 Cor. xv. 1; 2 Tim. ii. 8, 


xiv. 
86 Acts xxi. 21; 
i Chap. vi. 4, vii. 11; οὗ, chap. iii. 1, v. 12, 


ni Thess. i. 5; 2 Thess. ii 


3 The better orthography is εγκακουμεν SABD*G 17. 


5 DcEKL give συνιστωντες ; better συνισταντες SCD*G 17, followed by Tisch., 
or συνιστανοντες A(?)BP, adopted by W.H. 


instead of deprecating it, with nothing 
to hold back or to conceal from the eager 
gaze of the most suspicious or the most 
curious” (Stanley). The words Κυρίον 
πνεύματος will bear various renderings: 
(a) the Lord of the Spirit, which is not 
apposite here, (b) the Spirit of the Lord, 
as the A.V. takes them and the Latin 
commentators generally, (c) the Spirit, 
which is the Lord, the rendering of Chry- 
sostom, which is given a place in the 
R.V. margin, and (d) the Lord, the Spirit, 
πνεύματος being placed in apposition to 
Kvplov, neither word taking the article, 
as the first does not after the prep. ἀπό. 
We unhesitatingly adopt (d), the render- 
ing of the R.V., inasmuch as it best brings 
out theidentification of Κύριος and πνεῦμα 
in ver. 17. It is worth noticing that the 
phrase in the “‘ Nicene” Creed τὸ πνεῦμα 
+ + « τὸ Κύριον τὸ ζωοποιόν is based on 
the language of this verse and of ver. 6 
above. 

CHAPTER IV.—Vv. 1-6. HE DELIVERS 
WITH FRANKNESS HIS MESSAGE OF CHRIST 
THE TRUE LiGHT.—Ver. 1. διὰ τοῦτο 
ἔχοντες «.7.X.: wherefore, having this 
Ministration, sc., of the New Covenant, 
even as we received mercy (i.e., ‘even 
as we were mercifully granted it,” a 
favourite thought with St. Paul; cf. 1 
Cor. vii. 25, 1 Tim. i. 13, 16), we faint 
not; cf. 2 Tim. i. 7, ob yap ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν 
ὃ Θεὸς πνεῦμα δειλίας. He is still an- 
swering the question, ‘“‘ Who is sufficient 
for these things?” (ii. 16); but he, again, 
in the verses which follow, diverges from 
this main thought to answer the charge 
of insincerity which his opponents had 
brought against him. The tone of vv. 
1-6 is very like that of 1 Thess. ii. 1-12, 
which offers several verbal parallels. 


Ver. 2. ἀλλ᾽ ἀπειπάμεθα τὰ κρυπτὰ 
κιτιλ.: but we have renounced (the “ in- 
gressive aorist”; cf. ἐσίγησεν, Acts xv. 
12) the hidden things of shame; cf. Rom. 
xiii. 12, Eph. iv. 22, The stress is on 
τὰ κρυπτά; it is the openness and can- 
dour of his ministry on which he insists 
(cf. John iii. 20).—ph περιπατ. κιτιλ.: 
not walking in craftiness (see x. 3 and 
reff. above; περιπατεῖν = versari), nor 
handling deceitfully (οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ, 1 
Thess. li. 3, cf. chap. ii. 17) the Word 
of God, s¢., the Divine message with 
which we have been entrusted (cf. the 
charge brought against him and referred 
to in xii, 16, vis., that being πανοῦργος 
he had taught the Corinthians δόλῳ) ; 
but by the manifestation of the truth (cf. 
vi. 7, Vii. 14), sc., by plain statement of 
the truths of the Gospel in public preach- 
ing, commending ourselves (here is our 
Letter of Commendation, iii. 1, and cf. 
note there) to every man’s conscience (lit. 
‘*to every conscience of men,” 7.¢., to 
every possible variety of the human con- 
science ; cf. 1 Cor. ix. 22) in the sight of 
God, The appeal to conscience can never 
be omitted with safety, and any presenta- 
tion of Christianity which is neglectful 
of the verdict of conscience on the doc- 
trines taught is at once un-Apostolic and 
un-Christlike, These verses (1-6) have 
been chosen as the Epistle for St. 
Matthew’s Day, probably on account of 
the apparent applicability of ver. 2 to the 
circumstances of St. Matthew’s call and 
his abandonment of a profession which 
was counted shameful. But of course 
ἀπειπάμεθα does not imply that St. Paul 
had ever been guilty of using crafty 
artifices such as he here repudiates once 
and for all, 


60 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY=: B IV. 


ο Of seen γέλιον " ἡμῶν, ἐν τοῖς " ἀπολλυμένοις ἐστὶ κεκαλυμμένον" 4. ἐν οἷς ὁ 
pJoha xii. Θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου ἢ ἐτύφλωσε τὰ “νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων, εἰς 


40;1 John 


ii. τὰ only; τὸ μὴ " αὐγάσαι ἷ αὐτοῖς 2 τὸν "φωτισμὸν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς δόξης 


Isa. xlii. 


19. 
q Reff. ii. 11. 


τοῦ Χριστοῦ," ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ ‘Ocod.* 5. οὐ γὰρ ἑαυτοὺς 


τἭετε only; * κηρύσσομεν, ἀλλὰ “ Χριστὸν 5 ᾿Ιησοῦν Κύριον - ἑαυτοὺς δὲ δούλους 
c 


xiii. 24, xiv. 56. 


s Ver. 6 only; οἵ. Job iii. 9; Ps. xxvi. 1, Ixxxix. 8, etc. 
iii. 18 wu Acts viii 5; 1 Cor. i. 23; Phil. i. 15. 


t Wisd. vii. 26; reff. 


1 S$BGKLP support αυγασαι; CDEH have καταυγασαι, and A 17 διαυγασαι. 
2 DbcEKLP and the Syriac vss. add avrous after avy.; om. SABCD*GH 17, d,e, 


f, g, τ, etc. 
5 C has xvptov for Χριστου. 


* $ocLP and the Harclean add του aopartov (from Col. i. 15) after Θεου. 
5 BHKL, the Peshitto and Bohairic support iB Ἴησ.; SACDE, the Harclean, 


d, e, f, τ, etc., give "In. Xp. Ku. ; G, g give Kv. "In. Xp.; P has ‘ly. ν “ὦ Κυ.). 
the Jews (except, perhaps, Titus i. 15).— 


Ver. 3. εἰ δὲ καὶ «.7.A.: but even if 
our gospel (sc., the good news we preach ; 
see reff.) ts veiled (returning again to the 
metaphor of iii. 12-18), ἐέ ἐς veiled in 
them that are perishing ; i.e., the fault lies 
with the hearers, not with the preacher 
(cf. vi. 12, and see Rom. i. 28). Blass 
(Gram. of N.T. Greek, § 41, 2) points out 
that ἐν τοῖς ἀπολλυμένοις is almost 
equivalent to “‘ for them that are perish- 
ing” (cf. chap. viii. 1 and 1 Cor. xiv. 11 
for a like use of ἐν). 

Ver. 4. ἐν οἷς ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος: 
among whom the god of this world, sc., 
Satan. αἰών is an “age,” a certain 
limit of time, and so ὁ αἰὼν οὗτός (1 
Cor. i. 20, ii. 6) is ‘this present age,” 
over which the devil is regarded as having 
power (cf. Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12). We have 
the expression ai βασιλεῖαι τοῦ αἰῶνος 
τούτου in Ignatius (Rom., 6). Wetstein 
quotes a Rabbinical saying, ‘‘ The true 
God is the first God, but Sammael (i.e., 
the evil angel who was counted Israel’s 
special foe) is the second God”. Many 
early writers, beginning with Origen and 
Irenzus, through dread of Gnostic specu- 
lations, dissociate ὁ Θεός from τοῦ αἰῶνος 
τούτου, which they join with τῶν ἀπίσ- 
των. But this is a mere perversity of 
exegesis, suggested by controversial pre- 
judice. Beliar is twice called “the ruler 
of this world”’ in the Ascension of Isaiah 
(ed. Charles, pp. 11, 24).—érvdhwoe τὰ 
νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων : hath blinded (the 
“Ἰπρταβδῖνε aorist ” again ; fi ver. 2) the 
minds (cf. iii. 14) of the unbelieving. Out 
of sixteen occurrences of the word 
ἄπιστος in the Pauline Epistles, fourteen 
are found in the Epp. to the Corinthians; 
it consistently means “ unbelieving,” and 
is always applied to the Acathen, not to 


εἰς Td μὴ αὐγάσαι x.t.X.: to the end 
that the light (lit. ‘the illumination”) 
of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who 
is the Image of God, should not dawn 
upon them. This is the force of αὐγάσαι, 
even if, as we seemingly must do, we 
omit αὐτοῖς from our text; αὐγή is the 
‘‘dawn,” and αὐγάσαι is to be taken in- 
transitively. The R.V. marginal render- 
ing ‘that they should not see the light,” 
etc., does not suit the context so well. 


The A.V. “the light of the glorious 


gospel of Christ” is inadequate, as it 
does not bring out the force of the phrase 
τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς δόξης. δόξης is the 
genitive of contents (cf. the similar 
phrase, 1 Tim. i. 11); the substance of 
the good tidings preached is the δόξα, 
the glorious revelation of Christ (cf. ver. 
6 below). That Christ is the Image or 
εἰκών of God is the statement of St. 
Paul. which approaches most nearly in 
form to the Adyos doctrine of St. John 
(see reff. and, for the general sense, 1 
Cor. xi. 3, Phil. ii. 6; cf. Heb. i. 3). P. 
Ewald, who maintains that St. Paul was 
acquainted with a Johannine tradition 
of our Lord’s words, finds in vv. 3, 4 
reminiscences of conversations reported 
in the Fourth Gospel. Thus we have in 
consecutive verses (John viii. 44, 45) 
ὑμεῖς ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ διαβόλου é 
+++ οὐ πιστεύετέ μοι, and the expres- 
sion ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου is compar- 
able with ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτον 
(John xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11). The 
parallels are certainly interesting; cf. 
also the phrase εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ with 
John viii. 19, 42. 

Ver. 5. οὐ yap ἑαυτοὺς «tA.: for 
we preach not ourselves, but Christ Fesus 








om ee pe . era - eee dee Be eee ---- .-.--... τ 
oe ᾿ ee πε ος τς, Se ee 04 ΟΦ ΡΌΗΝΟ 
βου το ΠΟΤ τοὶ Spa pe 4.5... <I Sap ee 
5 τ ΟΣΜΌΣΝΣ mong ᾧ- - ce ts : — SS τ ΜῊ}... Ἂ en 
τς ρα Bs 4 


oe 


ΩΣ 
ὙΦ 





ὡς 
oe 


a 
es oe) 


_— 


Pen πον 
» -᾿ 


.--.. ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 61 


ὑμῶν! διὰ Ἰησοῦν. 6, ὅτι ὁ3 Θεὸς ὁ εἰπὼν ἐκ σκότους φῶς = ae 
Adpapau,* ὃς ἔλαμψεν ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν, πρὸς φωτισμὸν τῆς W See oni. 
᾿ γνώσεως τῆς "δόξης τοῦ ® Θεοῦ ἐν “προσώπῳ Ἰησοῦ ἴ Χριστοῦ. x Gol ts ἢ 
7. Ἔχομεν δὲ τὸν "θησαυρὸν τοῦτον ἐν 7 ὀστρακίνοις 7 * σκεύεσιν, πω it 
ἵνα ἡ "ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνάμεως ἢ τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ μὴ ἐξ ἡμῶν - 8. ἢ ἐν 20; Lev. 
" παντὶ " θλιβόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ " στενοχωρούμενοι - * ἀπορούμενοι, GAN’ z Ps. ii. 29; 


— 
Ses, 
os 


Acts ix. 
οὐκ " ἐξαπορούμενοι - 9. διωκόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ *éyxatahermdpevor* 15; Rom. 
ix. 21; 1 
Pet.iii.7. a Reff. i. 8. b Chap. vii. 5; reff. below. c Chap. vi. 12 only; cf. chap. vi. 4, xii. 
10, and Josh. xvii. 15; Isa. xlix. 19. di] ohn xiii. 22; Acts xxv. 20; Gal. iv. 20 only. e Chap. 
i. 8 τῷ ὃ f Rom. ix. 29 (Isa. i. 9); 2 Tim. iv. το, 16; Heb. xiii. 5 (Josh. i. 5); Deut. iv. 31; Ps, 
χχχνὶ. 25. ‘ 


183 17 have npev, a mere blunder, 


2 Ἴησουν is supported by A*BDEGHKLP and the Syriac vss. (cf. ver. 11); N*A**C 
17, the Latins and Bohairic give σου, which does not yield so impressive a sense. 


3 B om. o before Geos. 


4 Better λαμψει with S*ABD* and the Syriac vss.; Aapwar is supported by the 


remaining uncials and the Latins. 


5 D*G and the Old Latin vss. omit og before eAapy. 

6 Instead of του Qeov C*D*G, d, e, g, r supply αὐτου. 

7SCHKLP, the Syriac and Bohairic support “Ino. Xp. ; DEG and the Latins 
Ι 


give Xp. Ἴη.; AB 17 (followed by Tisch. and W.H.) omit 


as Lord (cf. τ Cor. xii. 3, “ No man can 
say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy 
Spirit”), and ourselves your slaves for 

esus’ sake (cf. τ Cor. ix. 19 and chap. i. 
24a ; see also xi. 20 καταδουλοῖ). 

Ver. 6. ὅτι ὁ Θεὸς w.7.A.: seeing it ts 
God who said “ Light shall shine out of 
darkness” (a paraphrase of Gen. i. 3; 
cf. Ps, cxii. 4), who shined in our hearts 
to illuminate (others) with the knowledge 
of the glory of God in the Face of Christ. 

hat is to say, there is nothing secret 
or crafty in the Ministration of the New 
Covenant; it is the proclamation of a 
second Fiat Lux (St. John i. 4, viii. 12) 
in the hearts of men (2 Pet. i. 19), The 
image of iii. 18 is thus preserved in this 
verse; we reflect the light which shines 
upon us from the Divine Glory, as mani- 
fested in Christ. 

Vv. 7-15. His BopiLy WEAKNESS 
DOES NOT ANNUL THE EFFECTS OF HIS 
MINISTRY.—Ver. 7. ἔχομεν δὲ τὸν θησαυ- 
ρὸν «.7.A.: but, sc., in contrast to the 
glowing and exultant phrases of ver. 6, 
we have this treasure, sc., of “the light 
of the knowledge of the glory of God,” 
in earthen vessels. The comparison of 
man, in respect of his powerlessness 
and littleness in God’s eyes, to an 
earthen jar made by a potter for his 
own purposes and of any shape that 
he wills is common in the O.T. (Job 
πα kee, XEN. τὰ, Jex. Xix. IZ; see 





σου (see ii. 10 above). 


2 Esdras iv. 11), and St. Paul works out 
the idea in Rom. ix. 20 ff. He also dis- 
tinguishes here and at 2 Tim. ii. 20 
between different kinds of σκεύη, illus- 
trating thereby the difference between 
men; while he himself is elsewhere called 
σκεῦος ἐκλογῆς, and St. Peter calls 
woman ἀσθενέστερον σκεῦος (see reff.). 
In the present passage σκεῦος seems to 
be used specially for the human body (cf. 
2 Esdras vii. [88], vas corruptibile), as the 
thought in the Apostle’s mind is (mainly) 
of his own physical infirmities; the 
figure being derived from the ancient 
custom of storing gold and silver in 
earthenware pots. The treasure of the 
Gospel light is contained in an “ earthen 
vessel,” a frail body which may (seem- 
ingly) at any moment succumb (cf. Job 
iv. Ig and see v. 1 below). This may 
appear surprising, that so great a treasure 
should seem to be exposed to the mishaps 
which may befall the perishable jar in 
which it is contained; but yet (though 
St. Paul does not pursue this line of 
thought here) it is the very principle of 
the Incarnation that the heavenly is 
revealed and received through the earthly, 
for ‘the Word became flesh” (St. John 
i. 14).—tva 4 ὑπερβολὴ τῆς δυνάμεως 
K.t.A.: that the exceeding greatness of 
the power, sc., which triumphs over all 
obstacles, may be God’s and not from 
ourselves. The weakness of the instru- 


62 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B IV. 


g Heb. vit ε καταβαλλόμενοι, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἀπολλύμενοι 10. πάντοτε τὴν "νέκρωσιν 


only; 2 


Kings ili. τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ 2 ἐν τῷ σώματι 3. ' περιφέροντες, ἵνα καὶ ἡ ζωὴ 


5 Rom. iv. τοῦ Ἰησοῦ 4 ἐν τῷ ὃ σώματι ἡμῶν * φανερωθῇ. 


19 only 

cf. Col. i 

5; Heb 
xi. 12. 

i Mk. vi. 55; Eph. iv. 14 only; 8 Macc. vii. 27. 


11. ἀεὶ“ yap ἡμεῖς 


it ot ζῶντες εἰς θάνατον παραδιδόμεθα διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦν, ἵνα καὶ ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ 


k Reff. ii. 14. 


1 KL and the Harclean give Kvptov, but it is not found in the best authorities 


and should be omitted. 


2 For ἴησου D*G, d, e, f, g read Χριστον. 
8 DEG, the Peshitto, Bohairic and Latin vss. add ἡμῶν after σωματι. 


4D*G, d, 6, g give Ἴησου Χριστου. 


5 89, τ, vg. give Tors σωμασιν (adopted by Tisch.); the received text follows the 
bulk of the authorities ; A and the Bohairic place φανερωθῃ before ev τῳ σωματι μων. 


6 G, f, g and the Peshitto give εἰ for ac. 


ment is to demonstrate the Divinity of 
the power which directs it (cf. chap. xii. 
g and 1 Cor. ii. 5). 

Vv. 8,9. ἐν παντὶ θλιβόμενοι κ-.τ.λ.: 
with a sudden change of metaphor, the 
Apostle now thinks of himself as a soldier 
engaged with an apparently stronger foe, 
and at every moment on the point of 
defeat; and in four pairs of antithetical 
participles he describes his condition: im 
every direction pressed hard, but not 
hemmed in; bewildered, but not utterly 


despairing ; pursued, but not forsaken 


(i.e., abandoned to the pursuing foe) ; 
struck down (as by an arrow; cf. Xen., 
Cyr., i. 3, 14 for this use of κατα- 
βάλλειν), but not destroyed. The general 
sense is much like that of Prov. xxiv. 16, 
Mic. vii. 8; cf. also chap. xi. 23-30. 
στενοχωρία is nearly always (in N.T.) 
coupled with θλῖψις (cf. Rom. ii. 9, viii. 
35, chap. vi. 4, and Isa. viii. 22, xxx. 6). 
With the play on words ἀπορούμενοι . - « 
ἐξαπορούμενοι, which it is difficult to re- 
produce in English, see on i. 13 above. 
The phrase ἐν παντί occurs no less than 
nine times again in this Epistle (see chap. 
Vi. 4, Vii. 5, I1, 16, viii. 7, ix. 8, 11, xi. 6, 
δ᾽ though only once elsewhere (1 Cor. i. 
5) in St. Paul’s writings. 

Vv. 10, 11. The climax of the preced- 
ing antithesis is now reached: “ Dying, 
yet living?’ ψ. vi. 9). πάντοτε τὴν 
νέκρωσιν κιτιλ.: always bearing about 
in the body the dying of Fesus, that the 
Life also ft hg may be manifested in 
our body; for we which live are ever 
being delivered over to death (cf. xi. 23 
below) for Fesus’ sake, that the Life also 
of Fesus may be cat gt in our mortal 

esh, The key to the interpretation of 
ver. 10 is to observe that ver. 11 is the 


explanation of it (ἀεὶ γὰρ «.1.X.); the 
two verses are strictly parallel: “our 
mortal flesh” of ver. 11 is only a more 
emphatic and literal way of describing 
‘our body’’ of ver. ro. Hence the 
bearing about of the νέκρωσις of Jesus 
must be identical with the continual 
deliverance to death for His sake. Now 
the form νέκρωσις (see reff.) is descriptive 
of the process of “ mortification”; and 
the νέκρωσις τοῦ Ἰησοῦ must mean the 
νέκρωσις to which He was subject while 
on earth (gen. subjectt). The phrase 
περιφέρειν τὴν νέκρωσιν τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ con- 
veys, then, an idea comparable to that 
involved in other Pauline phrases, ¢.g., 
“to die daily’ (x Cor. xv. 31), “to 
be killed all the day long” (Rom. viii. 
36, a quotation from Ps. xliii. 22), “to 
know the fellowship of His sufferings, 
becoming conformed unto His death” 
(Phil. iii: το), “to fill up that which is 
lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my 
flesh” (Col. i. 24), the conception of 
the intimate union in suffering between 
Christ and the Christian having been 
already touched on in i. 5. And such 
union in suffering involves a present 
manifestation in us of the Life of Christ, 
as well as ultimate union with Him in 
glory (Rom. viii. 17, cf. John xiv. 19). 
The phrases “ἰδ we have become united 
with Him by the likeness of His death, 
we shall be also by the likeness of His re- 
surrection,” and “if we died with Christ, 
we believe that we shall also live with 
Him” (Rom. vi. 5, 8), though verbally 
similar, are not really parallel to the verse 
before us, for they speak of a death to 
sin in baptism, while this has reference 
to actual bodily suffering in the flesh, 
And the inspiring thought of vv. ro, 11 





be 
Ν 
7 
4 
q 


| 
| 
: 


10—15. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B 63 
Ἰησοῦ! φανερωθῇ ἐν τῇ ᾿θνητῇ σαρκὶ ἡμῶν. 12. ὥστε ὁ μὲν 3. Rom. vi 

θάνατος ἐν ἡμῖν ἐνεργεῖται, ἣ δὲ ζωὴ ἐν ὑμῖν. 13. ἔχοντες δὲ τὸ 11) το, 
αὐτὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πίστεως, κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον, " ““᾿Επίστευσα, διὸ chap. ν. 4 


ἐλάλησα," > καὶ ἡμεῖς πιστεύομεν, διὸ καὶ λαλοῦμεν 14. εἰδότες mbacer 
ὅτι ὁ " ἐγείρας τὸν Κύριον * Ἰησοῦν καὶ ἡμᾶς διὰ ° Ἰησοῦ ἐγερεῖ, καὶ ο πὰρ νὸς 
" παραστήσει σὺν ὑμῖν. 15. τὰ γὰρ πάντα δι᾽ ὑμᾶς, ἵνα ἡ χάρις ἼΩΝ 
» πλεονάσασα διὰ “ τῶν * πλειόνων τὴν " εὐχαριστίαν " περισσεύσῃ εἰς 47: Col 
ude 24. ἘΣΎ omy viii. 15; Phil. iv. 17; 1 Thess. iii. ra, ete. Reff. ii. 6. 


τ Acts xxiv. 3; 1 Cor. xiv. 16; chap. ix. 11, 1a; Phil. iv. 6; 4 Macc. ii. a7. s Chap. ix. 8; 1 Thess. 
iii. 12; Eph. i. 8 


1C has Xpicrov; D*G, d, e, g ἴησον Χριστου. 
3 KL and the Harclean give μεν, but it is omitted by the best uncials and vas, 


5 6 and the Syriac vss. have 810 και ἐλαλησα ; om. και (with LXX) BCDEKLP 
and the Latins. 


*B 17,1 om. κυριον, but it is attested by overwhelmingly preponderating authority. 
δ s3cDcK LL and the Syriac vss. support δια ἴησον; better σὺν with §*BCDEGP, 





the Latins and Bohairic. 


of the present chapter is that Union with 
Christ, unto death, in life, has as its 
joyful consequence Union with Christ, 
unto life, in death, It is the paradox of 
the Gospel over again, ὁ ἀπολέσας oy 
ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ εὑρήσει αὐτήν 
(Matt. x. 39). It will be observed that 
the best MSS. give in ver. 10 τοῦ 
Ἰησοῦ. It is worth noticing that while 
in the Gospels the proper name Ἰησοῦς 

enerally takes the article, in the Epistles 
it is generally anarthrous. In addition 
to the example before us, the only other 

assage where St. Paul writes ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
is Eph. iv. 21 (cf. Blass, Gram. of N.T. 
Greek, § 46. το). 

Ver.12. The manifestation of Christ’s 
Life in the Apostle’s daily νέκρωσις is 
thus visible to the world and especially 
to his converts.—Gorte ὃ μὲν θάνατος 
K.T.A.: so then Death worketh in us (see 
on i. 6), but Life in you, i.e., the Risen 
Life of Christ, the source of present grace 
as of future glory. It is this latter aspect 
of ζωή, viz., as the life after death, to 
which his thoughts now turn. 

Ver. 13. ἔχοντες δὲ τὸ αὐτὸ ay. 
κιτιλ.: but, sc., despite our bodily weak- 
ness and the “working of death in us” 
of ver. 12, having the same spirit of 
faith, sc., as the Psalmist, according to 
that which is written, “1 believed, and 
therefore I spoke,” we also believe, and 
therefore also we speak, sc., asthe Psalmist 
did. The exact meaning of Ps. cxv. 1 
in the original is hard to fix; but the 
context would not naturally suggest the 
beautiful thought here readintoit. That 


faith must find expression, that it cannot 
be silent, is the Apostle’s adaptation of 
the words. With τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πίστεως 
cf. Rom, viii. 15, 1 Cor. iv. 21, Gal. vi. 
1, Eph. i. 17, 2 Tim. i. 7, etc. Deiss- 
mann (Neue Bibelstudien, p. 78) illus- 
trates the introductory formula of citation 
here employed by the legal formula κατὰ 
τὰ προγεγραμμένα which occurs in a 
Fayyum papyrus of 52 A.D. 

Ver. 14. Despite the contrast between 
death in us and life in you (ver. 12), we 
trust that we too shall share in that 
Risen Life of Christ. εἰδότες ὅτι x.7.d.: 
knowing that He who raised up the Lord 
Fesus Ab reff.) shall raise up us also 
with Fesus, sc.,on the Day of the general 
Resurrection (1 Thess. iv. 14), and shall 
present us with you (see reff.). Observe 
that the A.V. “shall raise up us also by 
Jesus’’ depends on a wrong reading, and 
perverts the sense. It would appear 
from this passage that the Apostle did 
not hope to be alive at the Second Advent 
of Christ (cf. i, 8, Cor. xv. 52), although 
at an earlier period he seems to have 
cherished such an expectation (1 Thess. 
iv. 15). 

Ver. 15. τὰ yap πάντα δι᾽ ὑμᾶς x.7.A.: 
Nba you, I say) for all things (cf. τ 

or. 111, 22) ave for your sakes (cf. i. 6), 
that the grace, being multiplied, sc., to me, 
through the (prayers of the) greater num- 
ber of you, may cause the thanksgiving to 
abound unto the glory of God. Cf. i. 11, 
a closely parallel passage, and Phil. i. 19. 
Except that we have deemed it necessary 
to translate τῶν πλειόνων literally (see on 


64 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


t Rom. xv. t ἃ. ῦ. 
si ge τὴν δόξαν τοῦ ἡ Θεοῦ 


shay’ win. ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἡμέρᾳ. 
19. ἡμῶν καθ 


u Reff.ver.t. 


ΓΝ. 16—18, 


16. διὸ οὐκ “éxxakodpev*+ ἀλλ᾽ εἰ καὶ 6 
ἔξω ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπος "Ὑ διαφθείρεται, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ ἔσωθεν 2 © ἀνακαινοῦται 
17. τὸ γὰρ "παραυτίκα "ἐλαφρὸν τῆς "θλίψεως 
"ὑπερβολὴν eis ὑπερβολὴν αἰώνιον " βάρος δόξης 


v Lk. xii. 38: “κατεργάζεται ἡμῖν, 18. μὴ Soxorodvtwv® ἡμῶν τὰ βλεπόμενα, ἀλλὰ 
I m. 


w tol. iii. 10 ἐν ‘ 
only; cf. Rom. xii. 2; Tit. iii. iy Heb. vi. 6. 
xi. 30 only; Exod. xviii. 26; οἵ. chap. i. 17. 


ii.6. ¢ Chap. v. 5, Vii. 10, ΤΙ, ix. 11, xil. 12, εἴς, 


τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα" τὰ γὰρ βλεπόμενα “πρόσκαιρα, τὰ δὲ μὴ βλεπό- 


x Here only; Ps. Ixix. 
z Ref. i. 4. 


; Tobit iv. 14. y Matt. 
a Reff. i. é. Ὁ Gal. vi. 2; 1 Thess. 
ἃ Rom. xvi. 17; Gal. vi. 1; Phil. ii. 4, iii. 17. 


ὁ Matt. xiii. ar; Mk. iv. 17; Heb. xi. 25 only; ¢f. 1 Thess. ii. 17. 


1 See crit. note on iv. I. 


2 DbcEKL support ο ἐσωθεν ; better o ἐσω ἡμῶν with SBCD*GP, 
8 D*EG, the Latins and Peshitto have προσκαιρον kat ehadpov. 


4 BC? and the Peshitto omit μων. 


5 K9*C*K, the Bohairic and Harclean omit εἰς vrepBoAnv. 
6 D*G, d, e, g have σκοπουντες (an anacolouthon) for σκοπουντῶων ἡμῶν. 


7G, g, t give προσκαιρα eortiv. 


ii, 6), the above is the rendering of the 
R.V. The A.V. “that the abundant 
grace might through the thanksgiving of 
many redound to the glory of God” can 
hardly be possible, and the position of 
πλεονάσασα in the sentence seems to 
require that the words be connected as 
in R.V. For the transitive significance 
of περισσεύω see reff. 

Vv. 16-18. HE IS SUSTAINED BY A 
Giorious Hope.—vVer. 16. διὸ οὐκ 
ἐγκακοῦμεν k.T.A.: wherefore, sc., because 
of the thought in ver. 14, we faint not 
(repeated from ver. 1); but even though 
our outward man is decaying, yet our 
inward man is being renewed day by day. 
That is, even though (note et καί with 
the indicative as introducing not a mere 
contingency, but a matter of fact; see 
reff. ver. 3) the ‘‘ earthen vessel” (ver. 7) 
of my body is subject to a continual 
γέκρωσις (ver. 10) and decay, yet my 
true self is daily renewed by Divine grace; 
it is in hope of the consummation of this 
“renewal” that I faint not (cf. Isa. xl. 
30). The contrast between 6 ἔξω ἡμῶν 
ἄνθρωπος and 6 ἔσω ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπος has 
verbal parallels in Rom. vii. 22, Eph. iv. 
22, 23, Col. iii. g (cf. also x Pet. iii. 4), 
but they are not quite apposite, as in those 
posse the thought is of the difference 

tween the lower and higher nature, the 
** flesh” and the “‘spirit,’”” whereas here 
the decay of the bodily organism is set 
over against the growth in grace of the 
man himself; cf. the expression of Plato, 
ὁ ἐντὸς ἄνθρωπος (Republ., ix., p. 589). 
The phrase ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἡμέρᾳ is a Hebra- 


ism ; it is not found in this exact form in 
the LXX, but it might well be a render- 
ing of OF) OV (cf. Gen. xxxix. το, 
Ps. lxviii. 19, Esther iii. 4). 

Ver. 17. τὸ yap παραυτίκα «.T.A.: 
for our present light burden of affliction 
worketh out for us more and more exceed- 
ingly an eternal heavy burden of glory; 
cf., for the thought (ever full of consola- 
tion to the troubled heart), Ps. xxx. 5, 
Isa. liv. 7, Matt. v. 11, Heb. xii. 11, 1 
Pet. i. 6, v. 10, and especially Rom. viii. 
18. παραυτίκα does not refer (as the 
A.V. and R.V. would suggest) to the brief 
duration of temporal affliction, but only 
to its being present with us now, as set 
over against the future glory (see reff.). 
τὸ ἐλαφρὸν τῆς θλίψεως offers a good 


instance of “the most classical idiom in 


the language of the N.T.” (Blass)— 
especially frequent in St. Paul—accord- 
ing to which a neuter singular adjective 
is used as if it were an abstract noun; 
cf. chap. viii. 8, Rom. viii. 3, 1 Cor. i. 25, 
Phil. iti, 8, etc., for a like construction. 
καθ᾽ ὑπερβολὴν els ὑπερβολήν is another 


Hebraism (see last verse), NY) IND 
=“ exceedingly” ; it cannot qualify βάρος 
(as the A.V. takes it) or αἰώνιον, but must 
go with κατεργάζεται, as above (cf. Gal. 
i. 13). Stanley points out that the col- 
location βάρος δόξης may be suggested 


by the fact that the Hebrew "Ta means 


both “ to be heavy” (Gen. xviii. 20, Job 
vi. 3) and “to be glorious” (Job xiv. 


μν es ᾿ 


ee ee we ee ee προ 





ὡς: 
»" 


π᾿ id 


-- 
— 











Vv. I—2. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


65 


μενα αἰώνια. V. 1. οἴδαμεν γὰρ, ὅτι ἐὰν ἡ " ἐπίγειος ἡμῶν οἰκία " John ii 


τοῦ "σκήνους “καταλυθῇ, οἰκοδομὴν ἐκ Θεοῦ ἔχομεν, οἰκίαν ὁ ἀχειρο- 
2. καὶ γὰρ ἐν τούτῳ “στενάζομεν, 


, a A 
ποίητον, αἰώνιον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 


τὸ οἰκητήριον ἡμῶν τὸ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ " ἐπενδύσασθαι " ἐπιποθοῦντες - Ἶ 


c Matt. xxiv. 2; Mk. xiv. 58; Acts vi. 14; Gal. ii. 18, etc. 
ς Rom. viii. 23. 
h Rom. i. 11; chap. ix. 14; Phil. i. 8, ii. 26; τ Thess. iii. 6; 2 Tim. 


only; Wisd., ix. 15 only. 
8; Col. ii. τα only; cf. Acts xvii. 24. 
Tohs xxi. 7. 


; 1 Cor, 
XV. 40; 
Phil if 
10, iii. 19; 
Jas. iii. 1§ 
only. 
Ver. 4 
d Mk. xiv. 
ἔνα; 4 only; οἵ. 
+ 


f Jude 6 only. 


1 DEG, d, e, f, g have ott οικοδομην. 


21); cf. the ambiguity in the Lati» 
gravitas. 

Ver. 18. μὴ σκοπούντων ἡμῶν τὰ 
βλεπόμενα κ-.τ.λ. : while we look not at 
the things which are seen (cf. chap. v. 7), 
but at the things which are not seen: for 
the things which are seen are temporal, 
sc., for the moment, but the things which 
are not seen are eternal, sc., for the ages; 
cf. Rom, viii. 24, Heb. xi. 1. Wetstein 
quotes a good parallel to this splendid 
sentence from Seneca (Ep. 59): ‘Ista 
imaginaria sunt, et ad tempus aliquam 
faciem ferunt. Nihil horum stabile nec 
solidum est... mittamus animum ad 
ea, quae aeterna sunt.” 

CHAPTER V.—Vv. 1-5. His EXPECTA- 
TION OF A GLORIFIED BoDY HEREAFTER; 
AND HIS DESIRE TO SURVIVE UNTIL THE 
SEconD ADVENT.—Ver. 1. οἴδαμεν yap 
«.t-A.: for (in explanation of iv. 17) we 
know, sc., we Christians (cf. Rom. vii. 14, 
1 Cor. viii. 1), that if our earthly (ἐπίγειος 
as contrasted with ἐπουράνιος ; see reff.) 
tabernacle-house be dissolved, etc. De- 
spite the fact that he was himself a 
σκηνοποιός (Acts xviii. 3) this is the 
only place where St. Paul employs any 
of the terms correlative to σκηνή. It is 
natural to think of the temporary charac- 
ter of the σκῆναι used by the Chosen 
People in the desert wanderings, an idea 
which is probably present in 2 Pet. i. 14, 
ἡ ἀπόθεσις τοῦ σκηνώματός pov; but the 
use of σκῆνος as ἃ depreciatory term for 
the ‘bodily frame” (R.V. mg.) is bor- 
rowed, as Field has shown, from the 
Pythagorean philosophy. It is the 
** tenement house,”’ the ‘‘ earthen vessel ” 
(see iv. 7), and is called in Wisd. ix. 15, 
τὸ γεῶδες σκῆνος. καταλύειν (see reff.) 
is often used of the ‘‘destruction”’ of a 
house; and the application of the word 
“dissolution” for death is probably 
derived from this passage.—olxoSopiv ἐκ 
Θεοῦ κιτιλ.: we have (t.e., at the very 
moment of bodily dissolution, when the 
Resurrection takes place, according to 
the Apostle’s thought here; see Charles’ 
Eschatology, pp. 395, 400) a buslding 


VOL, III. 


wom God, sc., not built up by the natural 
processes of growth but the direct gift of 
God, a house not made with hands (this 
being added to emphasise its ‘“ super- 
natural”? character; the σκῆνος of the 
natural body is also, of course, ἀχειρο- 
ποίητον, and so the idea is not as fitly 
in place as at Heb. ix. 11, 24, but it is 
suggested by the word οἰκία. It is just 
possible that his own trade of tent- 
making may have been in his mind at the 
moment), eternal, in the heavens. Cf. 
Luke xvi. 9, αἰωνίους σκηνάς ; as he has 
just said (iv. 18) τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰωνία. 
It will be observed that here αἰωνίος is 
used with the special intention of empha- 
sising the permanent character of the 
heavenly house, in contrast with the 
earthly house which is dissolved; it is 
therefore not accurate to say (as is some- 
times said) that alwvlos mever connotes 
length of time, although it is true that in 
St. John it is a “qualitative” rather 
than a ‘‘ quantitative’ term. 

Vv. 2, 3 and ver. 4 form two parallel 
sentences, both introduced by καὶ γάρ, 
of which either may be used to elucidate 
the other. Both bring out the Apostle’s 
shrinking from death, é.e., the act of 
dying, and his half-expressed anxiety that 
he may survive until the Day of Christ 
(cf. 1 Thess. iv. 15). 

Ver. 2. καὶ yap ἐν τούτῳ x.t.A.: for 
indeed in this, sc., in this tabernacle (cf. 
ver. 3), we groan, sc., being weighed down 
by the body, longing to be clothed upon, 
ἦ.6.,) to have the heavenly body put on 
in addition, like an outer garment over 
our mortal flesh, with our habitation 
whichis Ege heaven, sc., whichis brought 
thence by the Lord at His Coming (cf. 
1 Thess. iv. 16, Rev. xxi. 2,and Ascension 
of Isaiah (ed. Charles), iv. 16, ix. 17). 
The verb ἐπιποθεῖν always expresses in 
St. Paul a yearning for home; here it 
is used of the heavenly home-sickness of 
the saints. 

Ver. 3. εἴ ye kal ἐνδυσάμενοι κ.τ.λ.: 
if so be that (et ye = siquidem; cf. Eph. 
iii, 2, iv. 21, Col. i. 23) we shall be found 


5 


66 


i 1 Cor. xv. 
4, ete. 

k Reff. i. 8. 
1 Here only 
in Paul. 
song 1.7. Η 
ἢ Reff.iv.11. 7 wns. 
o Ref. i. 22. us ΐ bis 

p Ver. 8; 
chaps. vii. a 
16, X. 1,2; οὖν πάντοτε, 


Heb. xiii. es 
6 only. q Vv. 8, 9 only; οἱ. viii. 19. r 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINGIOYS B 


καὶ oods ἡμῖν τὸν " ἀρραβῶνα τοῦ ° Πνεύματος. 
καὶ εἰδότες ὅτι “ ἐνδημοῦντες 10 " ἐν τῷ "σώματι * ἐκδη- 


V. 


3. et! ye καὶ ᾿ἐνδυσάμενοι 3 οὐ γυμνοὶ εὑρεθησόμεθα. 4. καὶ γὰρ οἱ 
ὄντες ἐν τῷ oxyver® στενάζομεν “ Bapodpevor,* ἐπειδὴ > οὐ θέλομεν 
ἱ ἐκδύσασθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπενδύσασθαι, ἵνα "᾿ καταποθῇ τὸ " θνητὸν ὁ ὑπὸ 
5. ὁ δὲ κατεργασάμενος ἴ ἡμᾶς εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο Θεὸς, ὁ 


6. ? θαρροῦντες 


p. xii. 2, 3; Heb. xiii. 4. 


1 $9CKLP support εἰ ye; BDEG 17 have evarep. 
2D*, d, e, g have εκδυσαμενοι; G exAvoapevor 
5 DEG, d, e, f, g, the Syriac and Bohairic vss. give oxnver TovT@. 


4 D*G have Bapuvopevor. 


δ επειδη is found in a few cursives only; the uncials give ed’ ῳ-. 
9 G, g and the Bohairic have θνητον τουτο. 


7 DEG, d, e, f, g, πὶ κατεργαζομενος. 


8 δ" has o Θεος. 


®S$cDbcEKL and the Harclean insert καὶ before Sovs; the better authorities 


omit it. 
10 D*G have εἐπιδημουντες. 


also clothed, sc., with the heavenly body 
(note évSue., not ἐπενδυσ.» which would 
only be appropriate of the body to be 
“‘ superindued ” in the case of one surviv- 
ing to the Second Advent), not naked, sc., 
disembodied spirits at the Day of His 
Appearing, a condition from the thought 
of which he shrinks. γυμνός was com- 
monly used in this sense in Greek philo- 
sophy; Alford quotes Plato, Cratyl., p. 
2776., H ψυχὴ γυμνὴ τοῦ σώματος (see 
1 Cor. xv. 37) ; cf. also Philo de Hum., 4, 
τῆς ψυχῆς ἀπογυμνουμένης. 

Ver. 4. καὶ γὰρ οἱ ὄντες κιτιλ.: for 
indeed we who αγε in the body (see ver. 1) 
groan, being burdened (cf. Wisd. ix. 15, 
φθαρτὸν σῶμα βαρύνει ψυχήν), not for 
that (ἐφ᾽ ᾧ; cf. Rom. ν. 12) we would be 
unclothed (cf. 2 Esdras ii. 45) but clothed 
upon, that what is mortal may be swal- 
lowed up of life, t.e., that the mortal body 
may, without passing through death, be 
absorbed, as it were, in the heavenly 
body which is to be superindued (cf. Isa. 
xxv. 8). The double metaphor in these 
verses from that of a house to that of a 
garment is quite in St. Paul’s manner, 
Stanley finds the explanation of both “in 
the image which both from his occupation 
and his birthplace would naturally occur 
to the Apostle, the tent of Cilician hair- 
cloth, which might almost equally suggest 
the idea of a habitation and of a vesture” 
(cf. Ps. civ. 2). The truth is that no 
single metaphor could possibly convey to 
the mind a true conception of heaven or 
of the condition of the blessed. We may 


speak of the heavenly home as a place 
(οἰκητήριον), but we have to remind our- 
selves that it is rather a state here ex- 
pressed by the image of heavenly vesture, 

Ver. 5. ὁ δὲ κατεργασάμενος K.T.A.: 
now He that worked us up for this very 
thing, sc., the change from mortality to 
life, is God (cf. iv.6 and especially i. 21 
for the form of the sentence), who gave 
to us the earnest of the Spirit; of. Rom. 
vill. 11. The “ Holy ee of promise” 
is ‘an earnest of our inheritance ” (Eph. 
i. 143 see above on i. 22). 

Some theologians, e.g., Martensen, take 
a somewhat different view of vv. 1-5, and 
interpret them as implying St. Paul’s belief 
in a body of the intermediate state be- 
tween death and judgment, distinct at 
once from the “earthly tabernacle” and 
the “‘ heavenly house,” which latter will 
be ‘‘superindued”’ at the Second Advent, 
But (a) there is no hint elsewhere in the 
N.T. ofa#uch an ad interim body; (δ) the 
‘*house” which ‘“‘we have” at death is 
described in ver. 1 not as temporary, but 
as “eternal”. This it is which enables 
him to face death with courage; he 
would shrink from any γυμνότης or dis- 
embodied condition, and—so far as the 
**body”’ is concerned—he does not con- 
template any further change at the Day 
of Judgment. If it might be so, he is 
reverently anxious to live until the 
Parousia, and then to be “ superindued "ἢ; 
but even if he is to pass through the gate 
of death he is content. See Salmond’s 
Christian Doctr. of Immortality, p. 565 ff. 








ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYE B 67 


μοῦμεν ' ἀπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου “- 7. διὰ πίστεως γὰρ * περιπατοῦμεν, οὐ #8 Ref. ἵν. 2. 
διὰ " εἴδους - 8. θαρροῦμεν * δὲ, καὶ " εὐδοκοῦμεν μᾶλλον ἐκδημῆσαι pad 
ἐκ ὅ τοῦ σώματος, Kal ἐνδημῆσαι πρὸς τὸν Κύριον. ae 
9. Διὸ kal " φιλοτιμούμεθα, cite’ ἐνδημοῦντες, εἴτε ἐκδημοῦντες, scaly; 
“ εὐάρεστοι αὐτῷ εἶναι. 10. τοὺς γὰρ πάντας ἡμᾶς * φανερωθῆναι : xxiv. 17. 


3—I0. 


τὰ Rom. xv. 

δεῖ " ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ " βήματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἵνα " κομίσηται ἕκαστος 26,27; 

8 9 ΡΥ , ᾿ - a < ‘~ 10 chap. xii. 
τὰ 8 διὰ" τοῦ σώματος, πρὸς ἃ ἔπραξεν, εἴτε ἀγαθὸν, εἴτε κακόν. το; 1 


Thess. ii. 
v Rom. xv. 20; 1 Thess. iv. 11 only. w Rom. xii. 1, xiv. 18; Eph. v. 
10; Phil. iv. 18; Col. iii. 20; Wisd. iv. 10, ix. 10. x Reff. ii. 14. y Matt. x. 32, xxv. 32; Lk, 
xxi. 36; Acts xviii. 17; 1 Thess. i. 3, ii. 19, iii. 9, 13. _2 Matt. xxvii. 19; Acts xviii. 12, xxv. 6; 
Rom. xiv. 10, etc. a Eph. vi. 8; Col. iii. 25; 2 Macc. viii. 33. 


8, iii. 1; 2 Thess. ii. 12. 


1 DEG have αποδημουμεν- 

3 D*G, d, e, g and the Bohairic give Qeov for Kvptov. 

3G, ἢ, g have καὶ ov δια. 4S) 17 have θαρρουντες. 

5 AS* om. ex. δ D* 17 have Θεον for Κυριον. 
1 The Peshitto and f, g give the order evre ex8. evre evd. 

8 D*G have α δια του σωματος erpater. 

9 The Latin vss. (propria corporis) testify to a variant ιδια for δια. 


Ὁ BDEGKLP have κακον; $C 17 have φαυλον (probably an early correction 
introduced from Rom. ix. 11; it is, however, adopted by Tisch. and W.H.). 





Vv. 6-8. IN ANY CASE TO BE WITH 
CHRIST Is BEST.—Ver. 6. θαρροῦντες 
οὖν «.7.X.: being therefore, sc.,on account 
of “the earnest of the Spirit” (ver. 5), 
always, sc., in any event, whether we die 
before the Day of Christ or survive to see 
it in the flesh, of good courage, and know- 
ing that whilst we are at home in the 
body (see reff.) we are absent from the 
Lord, sc., from Christ, our true home. 
The O.T. phrase that man is a sojourner 
only (παρεπίδημος) on the earth (Ps. 
Xxxvili, 13; cf. Heb. xi. 13) is verbally 
comparable with this ἐνδημοῦντες .. - 
ἐκδημοῦμεν ; but the idea here is rather 
that of the body as the temporary habi- 
tation of the man’s self (cf. ver. 1). We 
are citizens of earth, but our true πολί- 
τευμα is ἐν οὐρανοῖς (Phil. iii. 20). 

Ver. 7. διὰ πίστεως yap x.t.A.: for 
we walk by faith (cf. John xx. 29, and 
chap. iv. 18), i.¢., in a state of faith (see 
note on διά with the gen. of attendant 
circumstances ii. 4), not by appearance 
(εἶδος, as the reff. show, must be thus 
translated = quod aspicitur ; but neverthe- 
less the rendering of A.V. and ΚΝ. ‘not 
by sight,” though verbally inexact, con- 
veys the sense. Cf. Heb. xi. 1, ἔστιν 
δὲ πίστις ... πραγμάτων ἔλεγχος οὐ 
βλεπομένων, and 1 Cor. xiii. 12). The 
verse is parenthetical and explanatory of 
the sense in which we are ‘‘ absent from 
the Lord”, ; 


Ver. 8. θαρροῦμεν δὲ «.7.A.: nay (the 
δέ is resumptive of the thought in ver. 
6, which has been interrupted by ver. 7, . 
the grammatical structure involving an 
anacoluthon), we are of good courage 
ἐς this is demanded even of the most 
aithful by the prospect of death) and are 
well-pleased (see reff. for cases where 
εὐδοκεῖν is used of men, not of God) 
rather to be away from the home of the 
body and to be at home with the Lord 
(cf. John i, 1 for such a use of πρός). 
Even if we must die before the Second 
Advent, we would say, we are content, 
for this absence from the body will be 
presence with Christ (cf. Luke xxiii. 43, 
Phil, i, 21-23), though the glory of that 
Presence shall not be fully manifested 
until the Day of the Parousia. 

Vv. 9,10. WE MUST REMEMBER THE 
JUDGMENT TO COME.—Ver. 9. διὸ καὶ 
φιλοτιμούμεθα «.7.A.: wherefore also we 
make it our ambition (see reff.), whether 
at home or away from home, sc., whether 
at His coming He finds us “in the body” 
or *‘ out of the body,” ἐο be well pleasing 
to Him; cf. Rom. xiv. 8, Phil. i. 20, 1 
Thess. v. 10. 

Ver. 10. τοὺς yap πάντας κιτιλ.: for 
(explanatory of the reason of our desire 
to be “well-pleasing”’ to Him) we all 
(τοὺς πάντας is emphatic, not only Paul 
who has been speaking of himself as 
ἡμεῖς, but “all of us” quick as well as 


68 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B ν. 


ete II. εἰδότες οὖν τὸν ἢ" φόβον tod " Κυρίου, ἀνθρώπους πείθομεν, Θεῷ 


χχχν. 5; 
chap. vii. 
1 and 


νερῶσθαι. 
Eph. v. πεφα Ρ 


δὲ πεφανερώμεθα: ἐλπίζω δὲ καὶ ἐν ταῖς “συνειδήσεσιν ὑμῶν 
12. οὐ yap) πάλιν “ ἑαυτοὺς “ συνιστάνομεν ὑμῖν, 


21. ἀλλὰ "ἀφορμὴν διδόντες ἡμῖν 3 καυχήματος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα ἔχητε 


ς Reff. i. 12. 
d Reff, iii. τ, 


e Rom. vii. 8, 113 chap. xi. 12; Gal. v. 13; 1 Tim. v. 14 only; Prov. ix. 9; 3 Macc. lii. a. 


1 DcEKL support yap; om. all vss. and ¥BCD*G. 
2 B*, d, e support διδοντες ἡμῖν ; better ὑμῖν with all other authorities. 
3 49B 17 have (wrongly) ὑμῶν ; ἡμῶν all other authorities. 


dead) must be made manifest. The A.V. 
“appear” weakens the force of the 
word; the Day of Judgment is to be a 
day when men’s characters shall be made 
patent to the world, and to themselves, 
as they have always been to God; cf. 
Mark iv. 22, Rom. ti. 16, xiv. to, 1 Cor. 
iv. 5, Rev. xx. 12.---ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ βήμ. 
κιτιλ. : before the judgment-seat 0 

Christ. In the N.T. (see reff.) βῆμα is 
always used (except in the quotation 
Acts vii. 5) of the official seat of a judge, 
although twice in the LXX (Neh. viii. 4, 
2 Macc. xiii. 26), as generally in classical 
Greek, it stands for the pulpit from which 
a formal speech is made.—tva κομίσηται 
ἕκαστος «.T.A.: that each one may re- 
ceive, t.e., obtain the wages of (see reff.), 
the things done through the medium of 
the body (cf. Plato’s phrase αἰσθήσεις αἱ 
διὰ τοῦ σώματος, Cited by Meyer; there 
is no need to identify διὰ τοῦ σώματος 
with ἐν τῷ σώματι of ver. 6 as the A.V. 
and R.V. do) according to what he did, 
sc., in this present life (note the aorist 
and cf. Luke xii. 47), whether it be good 
or bad (cf., for this constr. of eire... 
εἴτε, Eph. vi. 8, Phil. i. 18). Similar 
expressions are used of a future judg- 
ment, at, ¢.g., Ps. lxi. 13, Prov. xxiv. 12, 
Jer. xvii. 10, xxxii. 19 (cf. Job xxxiv. 11 ?) 
in the O.T., and in the N.T. at Rom. ii. 
6, xiv. 12, 1 Pet. i. 17, in all of which 
passages the power of judgment is as- 
cribed to the Eternal Father. But He 
‘*hath given all judgment unto the Son” 
(John ν. 22), and thus Christ is repeatedly 
spoken of as the future Judge of men, 
e.g., Matt. xvi. 27, Acts xvii. 31, Rev. ii. 
23, xxii. 12, and esp. Matt. xxv. 31-46. 
Cf. Luke xxi. 36, σταθῆναι ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ 
υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. And so (from the 
present verse) the variant Χριστοῦ has 
crept into the parallel passage, Rom. xiv. 
10 ,wavres yap παραστησόμεθα τῷ βήματι 
τοῦ Θεοῦ. A reference to the O.T. 
parallels makes it tolerably plain that 
the statement that men will be judged 


according to their works is a broad and 
general one, and that to find a difficulty, 
as the Fathers did, in the case of the 
death of infants (whether baptised or 
unbaptised), who are incapable of self- 
conscious and voluntary actions, is quite 
perverse. 

Vv. 11-13. REITERATION OF HIS SIN- 
CERITY OF PURPOSE.—Ver. 11. εἰδότες 
οὖν τὸν φόβον «.t.A.: knowing, there- 
fore, sc., because of the conviction ex- 
pressed in ver. 10, the fear of the Lord, 
sc., as Judge (cf. Heb. x. 31), ot 
men, sc., of our sincerity, but we have been 
(already) made manifest to God, as we 
shall be at the Day of Judgment (see ver. 
10). Toregard πείθομεν (cf. Acts xii. 20, 
Gal. i. 10) as referring to a “ persuading” 
of the truths of Christianity is to depart 
from the context. He is now returning 
to the question at iii. 1, and he has ex- 
plained the motives of his ministry and 
the obligations to sincerity of speech 
which bind him. We should expect Ἢ 
classical Greek) ἀνθρώπους μὲν eid. 
k.T.A., but the omission of μέν does not 
destroy, though it obscures, the anti- 
thesis. It would be out of place to speak 
of ‘‘ persuading” God of our sincerity ; to 
Him we are “made manifest” whether 
we will or πο.---ἐλπίζω δὲ «.7.A.: and 
I hope (as we say, “1 trust”) we have 
been made manifest also in your con- 
sciences ; see iv. 2 for a similar appeal. 

Ver. 12. οὐ yap πάλιν «.7.A.: we 
are not again (see iii. 1, and the note 
there; he takes up this theme again after 
a long digression) commending ourselves 
to you, but [write these things] as givin, 
you occasion of glorying on our behal ὶ 
We must understand in the latter clause 
some such words as. γράφομεν ταῦτα: 
there are similar anacolutha at vii. 5, viii. 
18.--΄να ἔχητε πρὸς τοὺς K.T.A.: that ye 
may have it, sc., some καύχημα or matter 
of glorying, against those who glory in 
outward appearance and not in heart, 
sc., against his opponents at Corinth. 


spielen 
᾿ς ee ΝΝΝΝΝ, κ(..... ϑ.τπὰὦ χω». ὩΝ ο. χ.»κ»ν Ὡμν κὐϑω 


~ "ον. χω 








1I—I5. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B 


69 


πρὸς τοὺς ἐν ᾿ προσώπῳ καυχωμένους, καὶ od} καρδίᾳ. 13, etre! Cr ς 


γὰρ "ἐξέστημεν, Θεῷ εἴτε "σωφρονοῦμεν, ὑμῖν. 


14. ἡ γὰρ ᾿ ἀγάπη 17 and on 


chap.i.11, 


τοῦ ' Χριστοῦ ὃ ἢ συνέχει ἡμᾶς, 15. ' κρίναντας τοῦτο, ὅτι εἰ" εἷς ὑπὲρ & ag only 


πάντων ἀπέθανεν, ἄρα ot πάντες ἀπέϑανον - καὶ ὑπὲρ πάντων ἀπέ- 
θανεν," ἵνα οἱ ζῶντες μηκέτι ἑαυτοῖς ζῶσιν, 


ii. 6. 
Xviii. 5. 


i Rom. viii. 35; Eph. iii. 12. 
1 Cf. Acts xv. 1g. 


in Paul; 
cf. Mk. 
iti, 21, 


ἀλλὰ τῷ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἃ Rom. xii. 


‘ 3; ‘fit. 
k Phil. i. 23 only in Paul; οἵ. Lk. viii. 37, xii: 50; Acts 


1 CDcEKLP have ov (D*G have ovx); better μη with NB 17. 
* CDcEKLP give καρδιᾳ ; better ev καρδ. with SBD*G 17. 
3 CP 17 and the Harclean have Θεου for Χριστου. 


“NcC*, fand the Bohairic insert εἰ ; om. \*BC*DEGKLP, d, 6, g and the Syriac 
vss. (it may have been dropped through inadvertence before ets). 


δ 6, f, g, etc. give ameBavev Χριστος. 


The phrase προσώπῳ οὐ καρδίᾳ occurs 
in x Thess. ii. 17 in the sense of πνεύματι 
ot σώματι (cf. τ Cor. v. 3, Col. ii. 5); 
but a better parallel for the present 
passage is 1 Sam. xvi. 7, where Samuel is 
told that while man looks els πρόσωπον, 
God looks els καρδίαν. So St. Paul 
here refers to teachers who lay stress on 
the outward appearance and the “face”’ 
(see note i. 11) of things, such as a man’s 
enthusiasms and visions (xii. 1 and ver. 
13), or his eloquence (chap. x. 10), or his 
letters of commendation (iii. 1), or his 
Jewish birth (xi. 22), or his personal in- 
timacy in the flesh with Christ (ver. 16) 
—rather than on the inward motive and 
“heart” of his message. 

Ver. 13. εἴτε yap ἐξέστημεν x.7.X.: 
for whether ~ on i. 6 er constr.) 
we are beside ourselves, it is unto 
God; or whether we are of sober 
mind, it is unto you (note the dat. com- 
modi). At a later period Festus told 
Paul that he was mad (Acts xxvi. 24), 
so impressed was he with the Apostle’s 
enthusiasm; and it is probable that the 
anti-Pauline party at Corinth were not 
slow to point to the “visions and re- 
velations of the Lord” which St. Paul 
claimed for himself (chap. xii. 1-6), and 
to the facility with which he spoke 
“with tongues” (1 Cor. xiv. 18), as 
proofs of his madness. A similar accusa- 
tion was made against his Master (Mark 
iii. 21). But St. Paul bids them (ver. 
12) look a little deeper, and not judge 
by mere outward phenomena such as 
these. He repeatedly asks them to bear 
with his seeming foolishness (chap. xi. 
1, 16, 17, xii. 6, 11). It is possible that 
a charge of a contrary nature had been 
also made by his opponents, and that 


his regard for other men’s prejudices (1 
Cor. ix. 20), and the “craftiness” with 
which he caught the Corinthians “ with 
guile” (chap. xii. 16), were urged as 
savouring more of worldly wisdom than 
of true piety. His answer to both charges 
is contained in this verse. If he has ex- 
ceeded the bounds of moderation, it is 
in his moods of highest devotion, when 
he is pouring out his soul to God and 
not to man; if he has exercised a sober 
prudence in his dealings with his con- 
verts, it is all for their sakes, and not for 
selfish ends. 

Vv. 14-16. IT 185 NoT THE Know- 
LEDGE OF CHRIST IN His EARTHLY Lire, 
BUT THE LOVE WHICH CHRIST HAS FOR 
MAN THAT IS THE CONSTRAINING POWER 
OF PAUL’s PREACHING.—Ver. 14. ἡ yap 
ἀγάπη τοῦ Xp. x.t.A.: for the Love of 
Christ constraineth us, sc., within the 
limits laid down in ver. 13. The words 
are often quoted as meaning that the love 
which Christians bear to Christ is the 
supreme motive of the Christian life; 
but however true this is in itself, it is not 
the meaning of the Apostle here. The 
genitive of the person after ἀγάπη is in 
St. Paul’s Epistles always subjective (cf. 
ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ Θεοῦ, Rom. v. 5, viii. 39, 
chap. xiii, 13, 2 Thess. iii. 5, and cf. also 
Rom. xv. 30, Eph. ii. 4, Col. i. 13, and 
for ἡ dy. τοῦ Xp. reff. above); i.¢., “the 
Love of God” and ‘the Love of Christ ” 
signify with him the love which God and 
Christ bear towards (eis) man. (St. Paul 
often uses the verb ἀγαπάω to express 
man’s love to God, but never the sub- 
stantive ἀγάπη). St. John’s usage varies, 
the genitive sometimes being objective 
and sometimes subjective (cf. John v. 42 
and 1 John ii, 5, 15, iii. 17, iv. 9, Ve 33 


70 


m Ps, cxii. ) . 
Siete ἀποθανόντι καὶ ἐγερθέντι 
48; John 
viii. 11; 
Acts 


xviii. 6. n Reff. i. 17. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


Υ. 


16. ὥστε ἡμεῖς ™ ἀπὸ ™ τοῦ ™ νῦν οὐδένα 
οἴδαμεν "κατὰ "σάρκα" εἰ δὲ ' καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν κατὰ 2 σάρκα Χριστὸν, 


1 The best supported reading is εἰ και ἐδ ΒΓ." 17; G, the Latins and the Peshitto 
have καὶ εἰ; ScC*?DbcEKL and the Harclean « δε και; K and the Bohairic e Se. 


2 DE, ἃ, e and the Bohairic have Xp. κατα σαρκα. 


see also Luke xi. 42), but St. Paul’s is not 
doubtful. The ‘‘ Love of Christ” here, 
then, is the love which Christ has for us, 
not the love which we bear to Him; the 
constraining power of Christian ministra- 
tion and service is more effective and 
stable than it would be if it sprang from 
the fickle and variable affections of men 
(cf. John xv. 16). 

Ver. 15. κρίναντας τοῦτο ὅτι els 
K.t.d.: judging this; that One died for 
all (cf. Rom. v. 15), therefore all dted, 
and He died for all, that they who live 
(see iii. 11) should no longer live unto 
themselves, but unto Him who died and 
rose again for them. To die ὑπὲρ τῶν 
φίλων αὐτοῦ is the greatest proof that 
anyone can offer of his love (John xv. 13). 
The proof to us of the Love of Christ to 
all is that He died ὑπὲρ πάντων. Of this 
Death two consequences are now men- 
tioned: (a) one objective and inevitable, 
quite independent of our faith and obedi- 
ence; (δ) another subjective and condi- 
tional. (a) dpa οἱ πάντες ἀπέθανον, then 
all died, sc., in Him who is the “ reca- 
pitulation” of all humanity, Jew and 
Greek, bond and free, faithless or believ- 
ing. We must not weaken the force of 
ot πάντες : the Incarnation embraces all 
men (cf. τ Cor. xv. 22). The A.V. “then 
were all dead”’ (the same mistranslation 
occurs Rom, vi. 2, Col. iii. 3) does not 
bring out the sense, which is that the 
Dying of Christ on the Cross was in some 
sort the dying of all mankind. But (δ) 
the purposes of the Atonement are not 
completely fulfilled without the response 
of man’s faith and obedience; He died 
for all, ἵνα of ζῶντες x.7.. This is the 
frequent exhortation of St. Paul (Rom. 
vi. 11 and’see 1 Pet. iii. 18); the purpose 
of Christ’s Death is to lead us to Life, a 
life ‘unto God” (cf. Rom. vi. 11, xiv..7, 
8)—the ‘life indeed” (x Tim. vi. 19) 
which must be begun here if it is to be 
perfected hereafter. The preposition 
ὑπέρ, ‘on behalf of” (cf. chap. xii. xo), 
employed in these verses is the one 
usually employed in the N.T. to express 
the relation between Christ’s Atoning 


Death and our benefit: it was “for our 
sake,” “on our behalf” (e.g., Luke xxii. 
19, 20, John x. 15, xi. 51, Rom. v. 6,1 
Cor. i. 13, Gal. iii. 13, Eph. v. 2, Heb. ii. 
9, I John iii. 16). Itis not equivalent to 
ἀντί, “instead of” (althoughin Philemon 
13 its meaning approximates thereto), and 
ought not to be so translated; although 
the preposition ἀντί is used of our Lord’s 
Atoning Work in three places (Matt. xx. 
28, Mark x. 45, 1 Tim. ii. 6), and the 
implied metaphor must have a place in 
any complete theory of the Atonement. 
But here ὑπέρ is (as usual) used, and the 
rendering ‘instead of,” even if linguis- 
tically possible (which it is not), is ex- 
cluded by the fact that in the phrase ὑπὲρ 
αὐτῶν ἀποθανόντι Kal ἐγερθέντι, ὑπὲρ 
αὐτῶν is governed by both participles. 
Christ rose again ‘‘on our behalf”; He 
is never said to have risen “ instead of 


. 16. ὥστε ἡμεῖς ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν 
«.t.A.: so that, sc., because of our con- 
viction, that we should not live unto 
ourselves but unto Christ (ver. 15), we, 
s¢., Paul as contrasted with his opponents 
at Corinth, from henceforth, sc., this con- 
viction having mastered us, know no 
man after the flesh, 1.6., are quite in- 
different as to his mere external quali- 
fications as a preacher of the Gospel, 
his eloquence, Jewish birth, etc.: we 
are not like those who glory ἐν προσώπῳ 
and not ἐν καρδίᾳ (ver. 12); cf. Gal. 
ii, 6.—el καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν K.T-A.: even 
though we have known (the distinction 
between οἴδαμεν and ἐγνώκαμεν is pres 
to be pressed) Christ after the flesh, 
i.e., though there was a time in my life 
when I, like my Judaising opponents 
now, laid great stress on the local and 
hereditary, and, so to speak, fleshly 
‘notes’? of the Messiah who was to 
come, yet now we know Him so no more, 
i.e., | know better now, for I have learnt 
since my conversion that the national 
Messiah of the Jews is Himself the In- 
carnate Word, to whom every race of 
men is alike related, for He is the Christ 
of the Catholic Church of God. In per- 











16—17. 


ἀλλὰ νῦν οὐκ ἔτι γινώσκομεν. 


»κτίσις- τὰ ὅ ἀρχαῖα "παρῆλθεν, ἰδοὺ γέγονε καινὰ ta? πάντα. 


14; οἵ. Rom. viii. 1; 1 Cor. i. 30; Eph. fi. το, 15. 


Paul. wr Here only in Paul. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


1 


17. ὥστε εἴ τις "ἐν “Χριστῷ, " καινὴ © Rom. xvi 


7; chap. 
xii. 2; 
Gal. i. 22; 
1 Pet. v. 


p Gal. vi. 15 and see below. 4 Here only in 


1 DEG, d, e, g add κατα capxa (to clear up the sense) after γινωσκ. 


2? DbcEKLP and the Harclean support καινα ta wavra; the stronger combination, 
NBCD*G, the Latins and the Bohairic, omit ra πάντα. 


sonal religion the merely historical must 
ield precedence to the mystical element ; 
it is of great interest and of real value to 
learn all that can be known about the 
Birth, Life, Death and Resurrection of 
Jesus of Nazareth, but it is the present 
Life of Christ, ‘‘in whom” we may be 
found if we will, that is of religious im- 
ort, as is further explained in ver. 17. 

his ‘‘is the same feeling which appears 
in the fact... that no authentic or 
even pretended likeness of Christ should 
have been handed down from the first 
century; that the very site of His dwell- 
ing place at Capernaum should have been 
entirely obliterated from human memory; 
that the very notion of seeking for relics 
of His life and death, though afterwards 
so abundant, first began in the age of Con- 
stantine. It is the same feeling which, 
in the Gospel narratives themselves, is 
expressed in the almost entire absence of 
enc as to time and place ” (Stanley). 

eyschlag and others (see Knowling, 
Witness of the Epistles, p. 2) conclude 
from the words εἰ καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν κατὰ 
σάρκα Χριστόν that St. Paul had seen, 
and possibly heard, Jesus during His 
ublic ministry at Jerusalem (cf. 1 Cor. 
ix. 1); on this interpretation the words 
would be introduced at this point to 
indicate that, however much stress the 
other Apostles and their adherents might 
lay on such outward knowledge, yet to 
St. Paul, though he could lay claim to 
it as well as they, this did not seem the 
essential matter. But (a) the words do 
not necessarily imply this; it is note- 
worthy that he says Χριστόν, not Ἰησοῦν, 
which we should expect on Beyschlag’s 
Be besis. (Ὁ) The explanation given 
above is quite in accordance with the 
usage of κατὰ σάρκα with a verb (see 
reff.), and the order of the words here 
and in the preceding clause does not 
allow us to take κατὰ σάρκα with οὐδένα 
in the one case and with Χριστόν in the 
other. (c) As Schmiedel points out, if 
St. Paul really had had personal experi- 
ence of the public ministry of Jesus, he 
would hardly have failed to mention it 


in the great apologetic passage, chap. xi. 
22-33. Other writers, ¢.g., Jowett, ex- 
plain the latter clause of this verse by 
supposing that the Apostle is contrasting 
his more mature preaching with his 
preaching at an earlier stage of his 
Christian ministry when he had not yet 
emancipated himself from Jewish pre- 
judices. But of his consciousness of 
such a “development” in his views, 
subsequently to his conversion, there is 
no trace in the Epistles. The contrast 
is really between Saul the Pharisee and 
Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles. 

Vv. 17-19. IN CHRIST ALL IS NEW, 
AS FROM GOD WHO RECONCILED THE 
WORLD ΤῸ HIMSELF IN CHRIST.—Ver. 
17. ὥστε εἴ τις x.t.d.: 50 that (a con- 
sequence of the higher view of Christ 
explained in the last verse) if any man 
(note the universality of the doctrine 
which he expounds) be in Christ, there 
is a new creation. To be ἐν Χριστῷ is 
a very different thing from claiming to 
be Χριστοῦ “ of Christ,” sc., of the Christ- 
party (1 Cor. i. 12, chap, x. 7); this in- 
deed is exactly the distinction which St. 
Paul has had in mind in the last verse. 
The expression “a new creation” was a. 
common Rabbinical description of a con- 
verted proselyte (see Wetstein in loc.); 
but its meaning was enriched in the 
religion of the Incarnation (cf. John iii. 
3, Rom. vi. 4, Eph. ii. 10, iv. 23, Col. iii. 
ro, etc.). The Vulgate ‘si qua ergo in 
Christo nova creatura,’”’ which takes τις 
with «riots, is plainly a mistake.—ra 
ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθεν «.7.d.: the old things 
have passed away; behold, they are be- 
come new, sc., not only the ancient 
customs of Jewish ritual observance, but 
the old ways of conceiving of the Messiah 
who was to come; more generally, the 
old thoughts of God and of sin and salva- 
tion nave received fresh colouring—they 
are “‘become new” (cf. Heb. viii. 13). 
The words of Isa. xlili. 18, 19 offer a 
close verbal parallel: τὰ ἀρχαῖα μὴ 
συλλογίζεσθε- ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ποιῶ καινὰ (cf. 
Isa. ἶχν. 17, Rev. xxi. 4, 5), but the 
parallel is rather in words than in sense. 


72 


sRom.xi. 78. τὰ δὲ "πάντα "ἐκ rod! "Θεοῦ, τοῦ 


36; 1 Cor. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


Vv. 


ὁ" καταλλάξαντος ἡμᾶς ἑαυτῷ 


viii. 6, Xi. διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ 2 Χριστοῦ, καὶ δόντος ἡμῖν τὴν διακονίαν τῆς "καταλλαγῆς" 
12. 


t Rom. v. 
10; 1 Cor, 
vii. 11, 
and vv. 

19, 20 : 

only; Jer, xxxi. 39 (LXX); 2 Macc. i. 5, vil. 33, 

v.11 xi. 15, 19 only; Isa. ix. 5; 2 Mace. v. 40. 

vi. 14; Rom. iv. 25, etc. 


1D*G om. tov. 


viii. 29; cf. Eph. ii. 16; Col. i. a0, 21. 


19. Yds "ὅτι Θεὸς ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ κόσμον καταλλάσσων ἑαυτῷ, μὴ 
λογιζόμενος αὐτοῖς τὰ “ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν, καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν 


v Chap. xi. 21; 2 Thess. ii. 2 only. w Matt. 


2 DcEKL support "Ino. Xp-; SBCD*GP and the vss. om. "lynoov. 


The thought of the new interpretation 
of life offered in the Incarnation carries 
us a step beyond the prophets of the Old 
Covenant. St. Paul’s words show how 
completely he regarded “the Death of 
Christ as a new epoch in the history of 
the human race. Had he foreseen dis- 
tinctly that a new era would be dated 
from that time; that a new society, 
philosophy, literature, moral code, would 
grow up from it over continents of which 
he knew not the existence; he could not 
have more strongly expressed his sense 
of the greatness of the event than in 
what is here said” (Stanley). 

Ver. 18. τὰ δὲ πάντα κιτ.λ.: but all 
things, sc., all these new things, are of 
God. See reff. St. Paul is especially 
anxious in this Epistle to trace up spir- 
itual blessings to their true source; see 
chap. i. 21, iv. 6, v. 5, and cf. x Cor. iii. 
23, ὑμεῖς δὲ Χριστοῦ, Χριστὸς δὲ Θεοῦ. 
-- τοῦ καταλλάξαντος κ.τιλ.: who recon- 
ciled (note the aorist) us, sc., all mankind, 
to Himself through Christ. The words 
καταλλάσσω, καταλλαγή should be 
studied (see reff.) in all the contexts where 
they occur. The verb signifies (i.) to 
exchange and (ii.) to reconcile, i.e., to re- 
establish friendly relations between two 
parties who are estranged, no matter on 
which side the antagonism exists. Thus 
in Matt. v. 24 it is the brother who has 
given offence (not he who has received it) 
that is spoken of as “ being reconciled ” 
to the other (cf. also 1 Sam. xxix. 4). And 
so too St. Paul’s usage is to speak of man 
being reconciled to God, not of God being 
reconciled to man; but far too much has 
been made of this distinction. In fact, in 
2 Macc. (see reff.) the usage is the other 
way, for God is there always spoken of 
as ‘‘ being reconciled” to His servants. 
It is, no doubt, more reverent in such a 
matter to keep as close to the language 
of the N.T. as we can, and to speak 
nakedly of God “being reconciled” to 
man might readily suggest false and up- 


worthy views as to the Supreme. But 
that St. Paul would have felt any diffi- 
culty in such a phrase is very unlikely. 
The important point to observe in the 
present passage is that it is God Himself 
who is the ultimate Author of this Recon- 
ciliation ; cf. Rom. v. 8, viii. 31, 32, and 
especially John iii, 16. That the Recon- 
ciliationis ‘‘through Christ” is the heart 
of the Gospel of the Atonement (cf. Rom. 
iii. 24, Col. i. 20, etc.).—xal δόντος ἡμῖν 
K.T-A.; and gave to us, sc., to me, Paul 
(he is not now thinking of others), the 
Ministry of Reconciliation ; cf. chap. iii. 
9, ἣ διακονία τῆς δικαιοσύνης, the geni- 
tive in both cases being, of course, of the 
thing ministered. 

Ver. 19. ὡς ὅτι Θεὸς ἦν κιτιλ.: viz, 
that God was reconciling the world, sc. 
the whole human race if. Rom. iv. 13, 
xi. 12, and note the absence of the 
article), to Himself in Christ (cf. Gal. ii. 
17). The pleonastic ὡς ὅτι is not classi- 
cal, but it is found in late authors (see 
reff.). The A.V., “God was in Christ, 
reconciling,” etc., is not accurate; ἦν 

oes with both καταλλάσσων and θέμενος, 
ἦν with a participle being more emphatic 
than a simple imperfect (cf. Luke iv. 44). 
If we take ἦν with ἐν Χριστῷ, we should 
have to treat θέμενος x.7.A. as a parallel 
clause to λογιζόμενος x.t.A., which it is 
not.— ph} λογιζόμενος αὐτοῖς κιτιλ.: not 
reckoning unto them their trespasses, a 
parenthetical sentence explanatory of 
καταλλάσσων ; cf. Rom. iv. 8 (Ps. xxxii. 
2).---καὶ θέμενος ἐν ἡμῖν κιτιλι: and 
had placed in our hands (cf. τ Thess. v. 
9, 1 Tim. i. 12; the verb is specially used 
of the Divine purposes) the Word of Re- 
conciliation, t.e., the Divine Message 
which speaks of reconciliation to God ; 
cf. Acts xiii. 26, ὁ λόγος τῆς σωτηρίας 
ταύτης, Cor. i. 18, ὃ λόγος τοῦ σταυροῦ, 
Phil. ii. 16, λόγος ζωῆς, etc. 

Vv. 20-vi. 3. As Curist’s AMBASSA- 
DOR HE ENTREATS THE CORINTHIANS TO 
BE RECONCILED TO Gop,—Ver. 20. ὑπὲρ 








18- ar, 


tov! λόγον τῆς καταλλαγῆς. 


ὡς τοῦ Θεοῦ παρακαλοῦντος δι᾿ ἡμῶν" 


20. "ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ οὖν 7 πρεσβεύομεν, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 73 


x Eph, v1. 
20; Phil. 


"δεόμεθα > " ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, Z εἶν Ui 
20 only. 


καταλλάγητε τῷ Θεῷ" 21. τὸν yap® ph γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν ὑπὲρ 2 only 


ἡμῶν ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς γινώμεθα ὅ " δικαιοσύνη " Θεοῦ 


ἐν, 12; x Thess. iii. το. 


a Rom. 


10;chaps, 
Vili. 4, x. 
2; Gal. 

i. 27, iii. 5, 2, 22, x. 3; Jas. i. 20; @ Pet. i. 1 only 


1 D*EG, g have (του) evayyeAtov tov Aoyov. 
2 D*G, d, 6, g have ov ὑπερ Xp. for ὑπερ Xp. ovve 


3 D*G, d, 6, g have δεομενοι- 


“Ὁ "6, ἃ, e, g and the Harclean margin give καταλλαγῆναι. 
5 \$cDcEKLP and the Syriac vss. insert yap; better om. yap with $*BCD*G 17, 


the Latins and Bohairic. 
5 Only a few minuscules give γινωμεθα; 


Χριστοῦ οὖν πρεσβεύομεν κιτ.λ.: we are 
ambassadors t evefore, sc., because to us 
has been committed the Ministry of 


Reconciliation, on behalf of Christ, as 


’ Christ’s representative (see on ver. 15 


above for the force of ὑπέρ), as though 
God were entreating by us (cf. vi. 1 and 
see on i, 4). The construction of ὡς 
followed by a genitive absolute is found 
also at 1 Cor. iv. 18, 2 Pet. i. 3.---δεόμεθα 
ὑπὲρ Xp. κιτιλι: we beseech you on 
behalf of Christ, Be ye reconciled to God. 
The imperative καταλλάγητε is much 
more emphatic than the infinitive καταλ- 
λαγῆναι (see crit. note) would be; all 
through we perceive the Apostle’s anxiety 
that the Corinthians should turn from the 
sin which beset them, whatever it might 
be in any individual case (cf. ii. 16, iv. 
I, vi. x, xi. 3). Note that the appeal, 
“ Be ye reconciled to God,” is based on 
the fact (ver. 18) that God has already 
“‘reconciléd us to Himself through Jesus 
Christ”. 

Ver. 21. The very purpose of the 
Atonement was that men should turn 
from sin.—rév μὴ γνόντα ἁμαρτίαν 
x.t-A.: Him who knew no sin (observe 
μή rather than οὐ, as it is not so much 
the bare fact of Christ’s sinlessness that 
is emphasised, as God’s knowledge of 
this fact, which rendered Christ a possible 
Mediator) He made to be sin on our 
behalf. Two points are especially deserv- 
ing of attention here: (i.) That any man 
should be sinless (cf. Eccl. viii. 5) was an 
idea quite alien to Jewish thought and 
belief; and therefore the emphasis given 
to it by St. Paul, and the absolutely 
unqualified way in which it is laid down 
in a letter addressed to a community con- 
taining not only friends but foes who 
would eagerly fasten on any doubtful 


all the uncials have γενωμεθα. 


statement, show that it must have been 
regarded as axiomatic among Christians 
at the early date when this Epistle was 
written. The claim involved in the chal- 
lenge of Christ, τίς ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐλέγχει pe 
on ἁμαρτίας (John viii, 46), had never 
been disproved, and the Apostolic age 
held that He was χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας . . . 
ἀμίαντος, κεχωρισμένος ἀπὸ τῶν ἅμαρ- 
τωλῶν (Heb. iv. 15, vii. 26), and that 

αρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν (1 John iii. 5; 
cf. St. Peter’s application of Isa. liii. g at 
1 Pet. ii. 22). That He was a moral 
Miracle was certainly part of the primitive 
Gospel. (ii.) The statement ἁμαρτίαν 
ἐποίησεν is best understood if we recall 
the Jewish ritual on the Day of Atone- 
ment, when the priest was directed to 
‘“‘ place” the sins of the people upon the 
head of the scapegoat (Lev. xvi. 21), 
ἁμαρτία cannot be translated “ sin-offer- 
ing”’ (as at Lev. iv, 8, 21, 24, 34, Vv. 9-12), 
for it cannot have two different meanings 
in the same clause; and further it is 
contrasted with δικαιοσύνη, it means 
‘‘sin” in the abstract. The penalties of 
sin were laid on Christ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, “on 
our behalf,” and thus as the Representa- 
tive of the world’s sin it becomes possible 
to predicate of Him the strange expression 
ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησεν (ποιέω being used 
here as at John ν. 18, viii. 53, x. 33). 
The nearest parallel in the N.T. is γενό- 
μενος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν κατάρα (Gal. iii. 13); 
cf. also Isa. liii. 6, Rom. viii. 3, x Pet. 
ii. 24.—tva ἡμεῖς γενώμεθα x.7.d.: that 
we might become, sc., as we have be- 
come (note the force of the aorist), the 
righteousness of God in Him (cf. Jer. 
xxili. 6, r Cor. i. 30, Phil. iii. 9, and reff.). 
“Such we are in the sight of God the 
Father, as is the very Son of God Him- 
self. Let it be counted folly or frenzy or 


74 


a Mk. xvi. 
20; Rom. 
viii. 28 a I b κενὸν 
Cor. xvi. 
16; Jas. 
ii. 22 only. 


ἐν αὐτῷ. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


Vi. 


VI. 1. “Zuvepyoivres δὲ καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν ph “eis 
τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ δέξασθαι ὑμᾶς 2: 2. (λέγει γὰρ, “Καιρῷ 
“δεκτῷ “ ἐπήκουσά σου, καὶ ἐν ἡμέρᾳ σωτηρίας " ἐβοήθησά σοι -" 


b Gal. ii. 2; ἰδοὺ νῦν καιρὸς ᾿ εὐπρόσδεκτος, ἰδοὺ νῦν ἡμέρα σωτηρίας ") 3. μηδεμίαν 


Phil. ii. 
16; I 
Thess. iii. 
5 only; Isa. Ixv. 23. 
cf. Ps. xix. 2. 


1 Pet. ii. 5 only. g Chap. vii. 9; Phil. i. 28. 


e Here only in Paul; cf. Acts xvi. 9, xxi. 28. 


Séy δ μηδενὶ διδόντες ἢ προσκοπὴν, ἵνα μὴ ᾿μωμηθῇ ἡ διακονία 4: 
c Lk. iv. 19, 24; Acts x. 35; Phil. iv. 18 (Isa, Ivi. 7) only. 


d Here only; 
f Rom. xv. 16, 31; chap. viii. 12; 
b Here only ; cf. Rom. xiv. 13; 1 Cor. viii. 9. 


i Chap. viii. 20 only; Prov. ix. 7; Wisd. x. 14 only; cf. 2 Pet. ii. 13. 


1 D*E*G, d, e, g give παρακαλουντες. 
2 D* om. vpas; δ Ἢ 17 have nas. 


3 D*G, d, 6, g give καιρῳ yap λεγει. 


4 DEG 73, the Latin, Sahidic and Syriac vss. add μων after διακ. 


fury or whatsoever. It is our wisdom and 
our comfort; we care for no knowledge 
in the world but this, that man hath 
sinned and God hath suffered; that God 
hath made Himself the sin of men, and 
that men are made the righteousness of 
God” (Hooker, Sevm., ii., 6). 

CHAPTER VI.—Ver. 1. συνεργοῦντες 
δὲ καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν κ-τ.λ. : and working 
together (that is, with God, as is plain 
from chap. v. 20, and also in connexion 
with 1 Cor. iii. 9; cf. Acts xv. 4), we, 
sc., I, Paul, entreat also (cf. chap. v. 20, 
Θεοῦ παρακαλοῦντος δι᾽ ἡμῶν) that ye 
veceive not the grace of God (a general 


phrase, frequently used by St. Paul to 


express the favours and privileges offered 
to the members of the Church of Christ, 
not to be limited to grace given at any 
special moment, as, ¢.g., at baptism) in 
vain (see reff, and cf. Heb. xii. 15). Note 
that “the grace of God” may be “τε- 
ceived”’ in vain; it is offered, indepen- 
dently of man’s faith and obedience, but it 
will not profit without these. The choice 
in the Anglican Liturgy of vv. 1-10 as the 
pistle for the First Sunday in Lent, 
when the Ember Collect is said on behalf 
of those to be ordained in the next week, 
is especially happy; the magnificent de- 
scription of the characteristics and the 
conditions of a faithful Christian minist: , 
(vv. 4-10) being prefaced by the solemn 
si of ee 
ΟΣ, 2, yet yap, Katpo Sexra 
κιτιλ, ; for He, sc., God, saith of. Boat: 
ix. 15, Gal. iii, 16), “At an acceptable 
time I hearkene to thee, and in a day of 
salvation did I succour thee” (Isa. xlix. 
8). The whole verse is parenthetical, 
and is introduced to remind the Cor- 
inthians that the present dispensation is 
that dispensation of grace of which the 
prophet speaks; tanley pointed out that 
δέξασθαι of ver. may well have sug- 


gested Sexrds, which in its turn suggested 
the quotation. The words in their original 
context are addressed by Jehovah to His 
Servant, while St. Paul takes them as 
addressed by God to His people; but, 
inasmuch as the Servant in the latter 
portion of Isaiah is the Representative 
of Israel, the application made by the 
Apostle is easily explicable.—l8o0d νῦν 
καιρὸς εὐπρόσδεκτος κιτ.λ.: behold now 
is the “ Acceptable Time,” behold now is 
the ** Day of Salvation”. This is St. 
Paul’s comment. Observe that he does 
not say σήμερον (cf. Heb. iii. 7 ff.), but 
viv—not ‘to-day,’ but “the present 
dispensation”. His point here is not (as 
it is often represented) that the only day 
of grace which we can reckon on is the 
present (gravely true though this is), but 
that the Christian dispensation isthe one 
spoken of by the O.T. prophet in familiar 
words. It will be remembered that Christ 
applied to Himself and His ministry in 
like manner the words of Isa. Ixi. 2, 
καλέσαι ἐνιαυτὸν Κυρίου ϑεκτόν (Luke iv. 
1g). We are not to draw any distinction 
here between δεκτός and εὐπρόσϑεκτος ; 
the latter is the usual word in secular 
authors, and (see reff.) is always used by 
St. Paul, except (Phil. iv. 18) in a quota. 
tion from the LXX, 

Ver. 3. μηδεμίαν ἐν μηδενὶ κ.τ.λ.: 
giving no occasion of stumbling (see 
reff.; Alford aptly quotes Polybius, 
Xxvii., 6, 10, διδόναι ἀφορμὰς προσκοπῆς) 
in anything, that our ministration be not 
blamed. ‘The clause is parallel with ver. 
1, διδόντες corresponding to ovvep- 
youvtes, both being descriptive of the 
way in which παρακαλοῦμεν, etc. ; cf., for 
like sentiments, 1 Cor. vili. 13, ix. 12, 22, 
x. 33. We have μηδεμίαν .. . μηδενί 
rather than οὐδεμίαν . . . οὐδενί, as it is 
the thought or intention of the preacher 
which is the point to be brought out. 





= 


ERS A ROT a ἡ ΤῊ ae 
bel Sal] eae = oe 
Ἢ ᾿ 5 - 






= τὴν ™ 








1—6. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS 8 


75 


4. ἀλλ᾽ * ἐν "ὶ παντὶ 'ounoravtes! ᾿ ἑαυτοὺς ὡς ™ Θεοῦ ™ διάκονοι," * τῶ ΣᾺ 
ἐν "ὑπομονῇ πολλῇ, ἐν “ θλίψεσιν, ἐν " ἀνάγκαις, ἐν “ στενοχωρίαις, | Reff. iv. a 


5. ἐν "πληγαῖς, ἐν "φυλακαῖς, ἐν " ἀκαταστασίαις, ἐν ᾿ κόποις, ἐν 


xiii. 45 1 
Thess. iii. 


" ἀγρυπνίαις, ἐν "νηστείαις, 6. ἐν VY ἁγνότητι, ἐν γνώσει, ἐν * μακρο- 2. 


n Reff. i. 6. 


θυμίᾳ, ἐν " χρηστότητι, ἐν " πνεύματι " ἁγίῳ, ἐν ἀγάπῃ * ἀνυποκρίτῳ, o Ref. i. 4. 


26; chap. xii. 10; 1 Sam. xxii, 2. 
xvi. 23; chap. xi. 23; οἱ. Heb. xi. 36. 
only; Prov. xxvi. 28; Tobit iv. 13. 
u Chap. xi. 27 only; 2 Macc. ii. 26. 
χ, 3. w Chap. xi. 3 only. 
y Gal, ν. 22; Col. iii. 12. 


q Rom. ii. 9, viii. 35; chap. xii. 10; ef. chap. iv. 8. 
s Lk. xxi. 9; 1 Cor. xiv. 33; chap. xii. 20; Jas. iii. 16 
t 1 Cor. iii. i 
v Lk. ii. 37; Acts xiv. 23, xxvii. 2 chap. xi. 27 only; Dan. 

x Gal. v. 22; Eph. iv. 2; Col. i. rz, ii. 
z Cf. Rom. xv. 19; 1 Thess. i. 5. 


1 Cor. vii. 
r Acts 


; chaps. x. 15, ΧΙ, 23, 27; 1 Thess. i. 3, iii. 5. 


12; 2 Tim. iii. 10, iv. 2. 
a Rom. xii. 9; 1 Tim. i. 5; 2 Tim. 


i. 5; 1 Pet. i. 22; Jas. iii, 17 only; Wisd. v. 18, xviii. 16 only. 


INcDcEKL give συνιστωντες ; Tisch. reads συνισταντες with ΟΡ" 17° 


2 D* has διακονους ; also f, g, vg. 


Vv. 4-10. THE CONDITIONS AND THE 
CHARACTERISTICS OF HIS APOSTOLIC 
Ministry. We have in this noble de- 
scription of his service a characteristic 
outburst of impassioned eloquence on a 
topic in which the Apostle felt an intense 

ersonal interest. But its fervour has not 

en permitted to interfere with the care- 
ful choice of words: the balanced anti- 
theses, the rhythmical cadences and 
assonances, which abound throughout, 
betray the literary training of the writer, 
and recall at once such passages as Rom. 
viii. 31-39, 1 Cor. xiii. 1-13. Indeed 
many of the phrases which follow 
suggest an acquaintance with the Stoic 
paradoxes expressive of the αὐτάρκεια 
of the ideal sage. Compare also chap. 
xi. 22-28, where he recounts in more 
detail the trials of his Apostolic ministry. 

Ver, 4. GAN ἐν παντὶ συνιστάντες 
κιτιλι: but in everything (the details 
being given in the following verses) 
commending ourselves (see note on iii. 
1) as God's ministers do, We now come 
to the description of the conditions under 
which and the means by which God’s 
minister commends himself to those to 
whom his message is addressed. The 
description naturally divides itself into 
four sections: he commends himself (i.) 
in outward hardships, vv. 4, 5, (ii.) in 
inward graces, vv. 6, 7a, (iii.) by the 
armour of righteousness, whether he be 
well or evil spoken of, vv. 7b, 8b, (iv.) 
having indeed a character the reverse of 
that ascribed to him by his opponents, 
vv. 8-10. 

(i.) The general description here is ἐν 

Ὁμονῇ πολλῇ : in much patience (see 
note on i. 6 and cf. xii. 12); and this 
is further amplified and explained in 
the three triplets which follow. (a) év 


. W.H. read συνιστανοντες with BP (cf. iii. 1). 


θλίψεσιν, ἐν ἀνάγκαις, ἐν στενοχωρίαις: 
in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses 
(see reff. and cf. Acts ix. 16), #.¢., such 
trials as sickness (see i. 6, xii. 7), or loss 
of friends (2 Tim. iv. 10), or perplexity 
(iv. 8, where see note), or any of the 
thousand chances (as we call them) of 
a troubled and anxious life. ‘‘ The pre- 
vailing idea is that of pressure and con- 
finement: each stage narrower than the 
one before, so that no room is left for 
movement or escape”’ iSeenieys 

Ver. 5. (δ) These outward hardships 
are next more definitely exemplified from 
the opposition and persecution which St. 
Paul encountered from opponents during 
his missionary experiences. ἐν πληγαῖς, 
ἐν φυλακαῖς, ἐν ἀκαταστασίαις : in stripes 
(see reff. and cf. Acts xxii. 24), im im- 
prisonments (see on xi. 23), in tumults (cf. 
Acts xiii. 50, xiv. 5, 19, xvi. 22, xvii. 5, 
xviii. 12, xix. 29, xxi. 30), ἀκαταστασία 
might mean inward disorder, rather than 
external tumult (see reff., LXX, and cf. 1 
Cor, iv. rr), but the latter meaning best 
suits the context here. (c) Next the 
Apostle enumerates the bodily hardships, 
voluntarily undertaken, which his work 
made it necessary to endure.—év κόποις, 
ἐν ἀγρυπνίαις, ἐν νηστείαις : in labours, 
sc., probably his labours in preaching the 
Gospel (see reff., but cf. 1 Thess. ii. 9, 2 
Thess. ili. 8, where κόπος is used of the 
manual labour he underwent in working 
for a livelihood; see also x Cor. iv. 11 
ἀστατοῦμεν kal κοπιῶμεν), in watchings, 
s¢., in nights rendered wakeful by anxiety 
or press of work (Acts xx. 31) or urgency 
of prayer (Acts xvi. 25 and cf, Eph. vi. 
18 ἀγρυπνοῦντες), in fastings. Some 
expositors explain these νηστεῖαι as the 
voluntary fastings of religion (so Hooker, 
Eccl. Pol., v., |xxii., 8; and cf. Acts xiii. 


76 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥ͂Σ B 


VI. 


bEph.i.t3i 7, ἂν "λόγῳ " ἀληθείας, ἐν “δυνάμει “ Θεοῦ, διὰ τῶν ὅ ὅπλων τῆς 


Col. i. 
2 Tim, 


. 


1 

18, 24, ii. 

5; chap. 

xiii. 4; 2 

Tim. i. 8; 1 Pet. i. 5. 
fChap. xi. 21, etc. ε Here only. 


2, 3). And itis true that νηστεία (see 
reff.) and νηστεύω are always (outside 
this Epistle) used of fasting as a devotional 
observance. But in the parallel passage 
xi. 27 νηστεῖαι is clearly used of involun- 
tary abstinences from food; and this 
meaning seems better to suit the context 
here also (cf. x Cor. iv. 11, Phil. iv. 12) 
(§ 23). The triplet (c), then, means “ in 
toil, in sleeplessness, in hunger ”’. 

Vv. 6, 7. (ii.) The inward gifts and 

ualities by the display of which the 

hristian minister commends himself are 
now enumerated. (α) We have, first, 
four graces, each described by a single 
word: ἐν ἁγνότητι, ἐν γνώσει, ἐν paxpo- 
θυμίᾳ, ἐν χρηστότητι: in pureness, 56.» 
not only chastity, but purity of intention 
and thought in general (cf. chap, vii. ΣΙ, 
Jas. iii. 17, 1 John iii. 3), in knowledge, 
sc., of Divine things (the λόγος γνώσεως 
is one of the gifts of the Spirit, 1 Cor. xii. 
8), in long-suffering (a grace specially 
needful for a Christian missionary; in 
Rom. ii. 4, ix. 22, 1 Tim. i. 16, St. Paul 
speaks of God’s paxpoOvpla, but generally 
he applies it to man; see Prov. xxv. 15), 
in kindness (see reff.; it is a Divine attri- 
bute in Rom. ii. 4, xi. 22, Eph. ii. 7, Tit. 
ili. 4; cf. Matt. xi. 30).—(b) We have 
next four qualifications, each described in 
two words: ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, ἐν ἀγάπῃ 
ἀννυποκρίτῳ, ἐν λόγῳ ἀληθείας, ἐν δυνάμει 
Θεοῦ: in the Holy Spirit (this ought to 
stand at the head of the list, but the 
order in which the various graces are 
mentioned is determined rather by sound 
and rhythm than by strictly logical con- 
siderations), in love unfeigned, sc., love to 
man, not love to God (see note on chap. 
v. 14 and cf. ἡ ἀγάπη ἀνυπόκριτος, Rom. 
xii. 9), in the Word of Truth, sc., the 
message of the Gospel (see reff. and cf. 
chap. ii. 17, iv. 2), in the Power of God, 
which (Rom. i. 16, 1 Cor. i. 18) he 
declares the Gospel itself to be. This, 
of course, is not the force of the phrase 
here; nor are we to think solely of 
‘*miraculous’’ powers (Acts viii. 10, I 
Cor, ii. 5), which were “signs of an 
Apostle "’ (Rom. xv. 19, chap. xii. 12), 
but of the Divine grace given him for his 
special work (see reff.). “In verbo 


d Rom. vi. 13; οἱ. Rom. xiii. 12; chap. x. 4. 
hx Tim. iv. 1; cf. 2 Tim. iii. 13. 


~ . δ δικαιοσύνης τῶν " δεξιῶν καὶ " ἀριστερῶν, 8. διὰ δόξης καὶ ἀτιμίας, 
¢Rom.i.16; διὰ δυσφημίας καὶ " εὐφημίας - ὡς ἢ πλάνοι, καὶ ἀληθεῖς - 9. ὡς 
ii, 1 ἀγνοούμενοι, καὶ " ἐπιγινωσκόμενοι - ὡς ἀποθνήσκοντες, καὶ ἰδοὺ 


e 1 Chr. xii. 4. 
k Reff. i. 13. 


i Gal. i. 2a. 
veritatis, in virtute Dei” may still stand 
for the watchword of Christian preaching, 
—(iii.) We have now three clauses be- 
ginning with διά; the preposition in the 
first of them being instrumental, in the 
other two expressing a state or condition. 
—(a) διὰ τῶν ὅπλων τῆς δικαιοσύνης 
τῶν δεξιῶν καὶ ἀριστερῶν : by the weapons 
of Righteousness on the right hand and on 
the left, sc., both offensive and defensive 
armour—the sword on the right and the 
shield on the left. See Eph. vi. 11, 1 
Thess. v. 8 for St. Paul’s more detailed 
description of “the panoply of God”; 
the idea being apparently taken from 
Wisd. v. 18 ff.; cf. for ὅπλα δικαιοσύνης 
Rom. vi. 13. 

Ver. 8. (δ) διὰ δόξης καὶ ἀτιμίας, διὰ 
δυσφημίας καὶ εὐφημίας: by glory (cf. 
John v. 41) and dishonour, by evil report 
and good report. To misrepresentation 
and slander St. Paul was much exposed, 
and he evidently felt it deeply (cf. 1 Cor. iv. 
12).—(iv.) Finally, he proceeds to specify 
the charges made against him by his op- 
ponents; he can afford to neglect them, 
inasmuch as in each case they are quite 
opposed to the real facts. Towards the 
close he adds one or two antitheses to 
the list, which may not have been directly 
suggested by the current calumnies about 
him, but which are yet quite in keeping 
with the rest. There are seven antitheses 
in all.—as πλάνϑι καὶ ἀληθεῖς: as de- 
ceivers (so his opponents said of him, as 
it was formerly said of his Master, John 
vii. 12; cf. chap. ii. 17, iv. 2) and yet 
true. In the Clementines St. Paul is 
expressly described by his adversaries as 
πλάνος and as disseminating deceit 
(πλάνην). ᾿ 

Ver. 9. ὡς ἀγνοούμενοι καὶ ἐπιγινω- 
σκόμενοι: as unknown, sc., an obscure 
person without proper credentials (cf. iii. 
2, x. 10), and yet well known (cf. xi. 6).— 
ὡς ἀποθνήσκοντες καὶ ἰδοὺ ζῶμεν: as 
dying (as was doubtless often reported 
when he was ill; see on i. 8 above, and 
cf. xi. 23, where he speaks of the continual 
hazards of his life), and behold we live 
(cf. iv. 10, where the death of the body is 
contrasted with the daily manifestation 
of the true life).—as παιδενόμενοι kal μὴ 





=, 


SH 


a 
Fe Beater 
ne nie eee 
——— ὦ 


ΕΞ 


τς 2 





7—13. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


77 


ζῶμεν" ὡς 'traSeudpevot,) καὶ μὴ ™Gavarodpevors 10. ὡς λυπούμενοι, ! 1 Cor. x. 


ἀεὶ δὲ " χαίροντες ὡς πτωχοὶ, πολλοὺς δὲ °mAouTiLovTes: ὡς μηδὲν 


ἔχοντες, καὶ πάντα " κατέχοντες. ᾿ 


im. ii, 
25; Heb. 
xii. 7, 10, 
m Rom. vii. 


11. Td “στόμα ἡμῶν “ ἀνέῳγε πρὸς ὑμᾶς, Κορίνθιοι,2 ἡ * καρδία 4, ville 13, 
ἡμῶν 8. "πεπλάτυνται" 12. οὐ "στενοχωρεῖσθε ἐν ἡμῖν, στενοχωρεῖσθε 5 Bees, αΝ. 


δὲ ἐν τοῖς ᾿σπλάγχνοις ὑμῶν" 13. τὴν δὲ αὐτὴν " ἀντιμισθίαν (ὡς 


16. o1 Cor. i. 5; chap. ix. 11 only. 


Ixxvii. 2; Prov. xxix. 45; cf. Eph. vi. 1 


2; Phil. 
WAS Σ 
Thess. v. 


p 1 Cor. vii. 30, xi. 2, xv. 2; 1 Thess. v. 21. 
9. τ Deut. xi. 16; Ps. cxviii. 32. 
t Chap. vii. 15; Phil. ii. 1; Col. ili. 12; Philm. 7, 12. 


q Ps. 
= Ghap. iv. 8 only 
u Rom. i. 27 only. 


1 D*G, d, e, g have πειραζομενοι for παιδευομ. 


2 w Κορινθιοι G, f, vg. and the Bohairic. 


θανατούμενοι : as chastened, sc., as a 
punishment for his sins, which had very 
probably been said of him when the 
news of his grievous sickness (i. 8, etc.) 
reached his foes at Corinth, but not killed. 
He does not deny that he has been 
“‘ chastened ᾽᾽ (see reff. and cf. chap. xii. 
7-9), but he recalls in thankfulness the 
words of Ps. cxvii. 18, παιδεύων ἐπαί- 
δευσέν pe Κύριος, καὶ τῷ θανάτῳ οὐ 
παρέδωκέν pe. 

Ver. 10. ὡς λυπούμενοι, ἀεὶ. δὲ χαίρ- 
οντες: as sorrowful (this charye in one 
sense was no doubt quite true), yet 
alway rejoicing. This, which is fre- 

uently spoken of by the Apostle as a 

hristian duty (see reff.), is specially 
prominent in this Epistle; cf. chap. 1. 
24, vii. 4, and the note on ii, 2,3. St. 
Paul’s words are an echo of the farewell 
words of Christ (John xvi. 22), ὑμεῖς οὖν 
viv μὲν λύπην ἔχετε . . . τὴν χαρὰν 
ὑμῶν οὐδεὶς oe ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν.---ὡς πτωχοὶ, 
πολλοὺς δὲ πλουτίζοντες : as poor, 50.» 
as ἃ pauper—the word is stronger than 
πένης (the ‘taunt seems to have been 
thrown at him; cf. Phil. iv. 12 and 
chap. xi. 7), and yet making many rich, 
56.. in the heavenly riches; cf. 1 Cor. i. 
5, Matt. v. 3, and esp. Prov. xiii. 7 (a 
passage which seems to have been in the 
Apostle’s mind), εἰσὶν of πλουτίζοντες 
ἑαυτοὺς μηδὲν ἔχοντες, καὶ εἰσὶν of 
ταπεινοῦντες ἑαυτοὺς ἐν πολλῷ πλούτῳ.--- 
ὡς Ἐν ἔχοντες καὶ πάντα κατέχοντες : 
as having nothing and yet possessing all 
things; cf. = Cor. iii. 22, ““ 411 things are 
yours”. κατέχειν (see reff.) isa stronger 
word than ἔχειν ; it is ““ἴο hold fast ” or 
“to possess,’’ as, ¢.g., the land of pro- 
mise (Josh. i. 11). 

Vv. 11-13. AFFECTIONATE DECLARA- 
TION OF HIS FRANKNESS AND SYMPATHY, 
AND AN APPEAL THAT THE CORINTHIANS 
SHOULD SHOW THE SAME.—Ver. II. τὸ 
στόμα ἡμῶν K.T.A.: our mouth is oper 


5 NB have ἡ καρδ. υμων. 


(ἀνέῳγα = ἀνέωγμαι, as often in later 
Greek; observe its present signification, 
as at 1 Cor. xvi. 9) unto you, O Corin- 
thians, 1.e., 1 am speaking quite candidly 
and freely tc you (see reff.). Only here 
and at Gal. iii. 1, Phil. iv. 15, does St. 
Paul call his correspondents by name; 
here it emphasises the affectionate nature 
of his appeal, and it singles out the 
Corinthians from the wider circle to 
whom the letter was addressed (i. 1).— 
καρδία ἡμῶν «.T.A.: our heartis enlarged, 
which is indeed the reason of his freedom 
of speech, for ἐκ τοῦ περισσεύματος τῆς 
καρδίας τὸ στόμα λαλεῖ (Matt. xii. 34). 
By enlargement of heart is meant here a 
widening of sympathy, and not the ex- 
pansiveness of joy (Isa. lx. 5) or an in 
crease in intelligence and wisdom (1 
Kings iv. 29). 

Ver. 12, οὐ στενοχωρεῖσθε ἐν ἡμῖν 
κιτιλ.: ye are not strattened in us (this 
carries on the metaphor of πεπλάτυνται), 
but ye are straitened in your own affec- 
tions ; i.e., his adversaries at Corinth may 
have said that he was a man of narrow 
sympathies, and that there was no room 
in his heart for his Corinthian converts, 
but, in fact, the lack of sympathy was on 
their side—it is they that are ‘‘ narrow- 
minded”. τὰ omwAdyxva=the upper 
viscera, 7.¢., the heart, lungs and liver, 
the vital parts, and so may be rendered 
‘the affections ”’. 

Ver. 13. τὴν δὲ αὐτὴν ἀντιμισθίαν 
K.T-A.: now for a recompense in ltke kind 
(an accus. abs.)—I speak as unto chil- 
dren, sc., who should respect and imitate 
their parents (cf. 1 Cor. iv. 14)—be ye also 
enlarged, sc., in heart. 

Vv. 14-vii. 1. PARENTHETICAL.—HE 
WARNS THEM AGAINST TOO FAMILIAR 
ASSOCIATION WITH THEIR HEATHEN 
NEIGHBOURS. These verses are some- 
what perplexing, inasmuch as they seem 
to interrupt the appeal of vv. 11-13 by 


78 ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B VI. 


v Hereonly; réxvoug λέγω) πλατύνθητε Kai ὑμεῖς. 
ev. 


cf. L Ἑ , 2 

xix. 19. γοῦντες ἀπίστοις “" 
wHere only; 

Ps. cxxi. τί 


14. Μὴ 1 γίνεσθε * ἑτεροζυ- 


τίς γὰρ “ μετοχὴ δικαιοσύνῃ ὅ καὶ * ἀνομίᾳ ; 
st δὲ "κοινωνία φωτὶ δ πρὸς σκότος ; 15. τίς δὲ "συμφώνησις 


4; 9,..1 τὴ Ὦ 
Ὅτι χ. 17, Χριστῷ ὁ πρὸς "Βελίαρῖ; ἢ τίς " μερὶς πιστῷ ὃ μετὰ ἀπίστου ; 
21 


x Rom. iv. , vi. 19; 2 Thess. ii. 7; Tit. ii. sag y spr ρα viii. 4, ix. 13, xiii. 13, ete.; οὐ, Ecclus. xiii. 
a 


17. z Here only; cf. 1 Cor, vii.5; Lk. v. 


1G, d, e, f, g and the Peshitto have καὶ py. 


ere only. ὃ Col. i, 12; ef. 1 Kings xii. 16. 


2G has pera απιστων. 


3G has ϑικαιοσυνης μετα avoptas; D* δικαιοσυνης και αδικιας ; DcE δικαιοσυνη 


και αδικια. 


4 Καὶ and the Harclean text have τις δε; better ἡ τις with the principal uncials 


“nd vss. 
5 D*, d, e give φωτος. 


6 DEGKL, g and the Syriac vss. give Xpiorw; better Χριστου with ΣΦ ΒΟΡ 17, 


d, e, f and the Bohairic. 


7 Βελιαρ is the right spelling; D*EK have βελιαν and G βελιαβ ; βελιαλ appears 


in a few cursives only, and in f, g, vg. 


8 B 17 and the Bohairic have πιστου for morg. 


the introduction of an irrelevant warning. 
If they be omitted, the argument is quite 
consecutive, vii. 2 f. being in close and 
evident connexion with vi. 11-13. And 
it has been supposed that the whole 
section is an interpolation either (a) 
added by St. Paul after the arrival of 
Titus, in consequence of the news he 
had received as to the state of the 
Corinthian Church; or (δ) belonging to 
another Pauline letter (possibly the Lost 
Epistle of 1 Cor. v. 9), and inserted here 
at a later date when a collection of 
Pauline letters began to be made; or (c) 
it has been regarded (¢.g., by Heinrici) asa 
fragment of an ancient homily, not by St. 
Paul, which has found a resting place 
here. It is urged in favour of the non- 
Pauline authorship of the section that (a) 
it contains a considerable number of 
words which do not occur elsewhere in 
St. Paul. To this it may be replied that 
ἑτεροζυγεῖν and βελίαρ have their origin 
in O.T. phraseology, while μολυσμός is 
a LXX word (see reff.) ; and that, as to 
the words μετοχή, συμφώνησις, συγκατά- 
θεσις, it is not surprising that some of the 
synonyms which are found in this section 
should be comparatively rare. It is not 
easy to find (as has here been done, with 
no small skill) five distinct terms to con- 
vey almost the same idea. (B) Schmiedel 
urges that the phrase μολυσμός σαρκός 
(vii. 1) is quite un-Pauline, and that it is 
inconsistent with St. Paul’s psychology 
to speak of being ‘‘cleansed”’ from it, 
inasmuch as for him the σάρξ is always 
tainted by sin. But there is no thought 
here of the taint of sin which remains in 


fallen man; μολυσμός is always used in 
the LXX (see reff.) of a too intimate 
association of the chosen people with 
heathen nations, and such ‘‘contamina- 
tion”’ is exactly what it stands for in this 
place. As an argument on the other side, 
there occur in this section several quite 
common Pauline ideas and phrases, 
é.g., the contrast of Christianity and 
heathendom as light and darkness (ver. 
14), the description of Christians as God’s 
temple (ver. 16), the phrases “ the living 
God ”’ (ver. 16) and “ the fear of God ” (vil. 
1), the introduction of the term ἀγαπητοί 
(vii. 1), etc. We regard, therefore, the 
section as undoubtedly Pauline; and, 
further, its connexion with what precedes 
reveals itself on a close inspection of the 
phraseology. The Apostle has bidden the 
Corinthians “ Be ye enlarged in heart”’. 
But he is reminded that this phrase has 
a bad meaning in the Law (Deut. xi. 16; 
see Chase, Classical Review, 1890, p. 
151), where it is applied to that excessive 
tolerance which should permit the wor- 
ship of other gods beside Jehovah; and 
so he hastens to give a warning (paren- 
thetically introduced) to the Corinthians 
that he does not mean by enlargement of 
heart any undue tolerance of or con- 
taminating association with their heathen 
neighbours (see on iv. 4 above for 
ἄπιστος). 

Ver. 14. Μὴ γίνεσθε ἑτεροζυγοῦντες 
κιτολο: be not (mark that the pres. tense 
γίνεσθε indicates the beginning ofa state, 
sc., ‘*do not become”’) unequally yoked 
with unbelievers, the constr. being “ be 
not unequally yoked, as you would be if 














14—18. 


16. tis δὲ "συγκατάθεσις ναῷ Θεοῦ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β 79 


ς Here only: 


μετὰ εἰδώλων ; ὑμεῖς ὦ γὰρ cf. Lk 


ὁ ναὸς 3 ** Θεοῦ gore! “ζῶντος, καθὼς 3 εἶπεν ὁ Θεὸς, “Ὅτι ᾿ ἐνοικήσω 3 xxiii. 51. 


1 Cor, iii. 
16,17; 2 


“ 4 ε 2 " ” >, A 4 4 A > A 
ἐν αὐτοῖς καὶ " ἐμπεριπατήσω - καὶ ἔσομαι αὐτῶν ὁ Θεὸς, καὶ αὐτοὶ Thee ἢ 


ἔσονταί μοι ὅ λαός". 


17. "Sd “ ἐξέλθετε ἐκ μέσου αὐτῶν καὶ 


; of. i 


or. Vi. 


ἀφορίσθητε," λέγει Κύριος, “καὶ ἀκαθάρτου μὴ Gwrecbe-” “κἀγὼ 19; Eph. 


1, 21. 


εἰσδέξομαι ὑμᾶς, 18. καὶ " ἔσομαι ὑμῖν εἰς πατέρα, καὶ ὑμεῖς ¢ Refi. iii. 3, 


ἔσεσθέ μοι εἰς υἱοὺς καὶ θυγατέρας, ᾿'' λέγει ' Κύριος ' παντοκράτωρ. 


Tim. i. 5, 14 only. Lev. xxvi. 12. 


k 2 Sam. vii. 14; οἵ, Isa. xi. 6. 


8 Isa. lii. rz. 
12 Sam. vii. 8; 


Rom. viii. 
11; Col. 
iii. 16; 2 
i Ezek. xx. 34; ε΄. Zeph. iii. 20. 
cf. Rev. iv. 8, etc. 


1 N8cCDcEGK, f, g and the Syriac vss. (probably from 1x Cor. iii. 16) support 
upets . - - ἐστε; better ἡμεῖς . + - ἐσμεν with N*BD*LP, d, e and the Bohairic. 


2 ΝΠ has ναοι. 


3 For καθως ειπεν D*EG, d, e, g have (wrongly) λεγει yap (see note). 


4 6Ρ, g have avtots for avtwy. 


5 DEGKL, vg. read pot; better pov with BCP 17. 
9 DEKLP give εἐξελθετε; better εξελθατε with ἐ ΒΟ 17, 


you were yoked with unbelievers”. The 
most obvious application of such a pro- 
hibition would be to intermarriage with 
the heathen, which was continually for- 
bidden to the chosen people (see Deut. 
vii. 3, Josh. xxiii, 12, Ezra ix. 2, Neh. xiii. 
25), and this is probably the main thought 
here (see ref. Lev. for ἑτερόζυγος) ; but 
to indulge in amy excessive familiarity 
of intercourse would be “το be enlarged 
in heart’ in a way which the Apostle 
strongly deprecates (cf. 1 Macc. i. 15). 
He enforces this by five contrasts which 
illustrate the incongruity between Chris- 
tianity and heathendom.—ris yap μετοχὴ 
TA: for what ‘gaateneegs have right- 
eousness and lawlessness ? or what com- 
munion has light with darkness? Cf. 
Eph. v. 7, μὴ οὖν γίνεσϑε συμμέτοχοι 
αὐτῶν" ἦτε γάρ ποτε σκότος, νῦν δὲ φῶς 
ἐν Κυρίῳ, and cf., for the same image, 
Acts xxvi. 18, Rom. xiii. 12, 1 Thess. v. 5 
and chap. iv. 6, xi. 14. 

Ver. 15. τίς δὲ συμφώνησις κ.τ.λ.: 
and what concord has Christ with Belial ? 
or what portion has a believer, sc.,a Chris- 
tian (see Acts xvi. 1, Eph. i, 1, Col. i. 2, 
etc.), with an unbelicver, sc., a heathen 


(see on iv. 4 above) ? λα». = worth- 


lessness is frequently rendered παράνομος 
(Deut. xiii. 13, 1 Kings xx. 13) or ἀνομία 
(Ps. xvii. 5) by the LXX; they never 
treat it asa proper name, although Theo- 
dotion does so at Judges xix, 22, and it is 
so regarded in later literature (e.g., Test. 
ΧΙ. Patriarch. and Orac. Sibyll., iti., 63, 
73). Here it is the personification of 
ἀνομία, just as Christ is the personifica- 


tion of δικαιοσύνη ; che contrast is that 
between Christ and Satan (cf. 1 Cor. x. 21). 
See Charles’ Ascension of Isatah, pp. ἵν. ff., 
for the identification of Beliar with Satan. 
The Hebrew form, Belial, with a sub- 
stitution of r for J, is written βελίαρ in 
the best Greek MSS. (see crit. note). 
Ver. 16. τίς δὲ κατάθεσις κ.τ.λ.: 
and what agreement has the Temple of 
God with idols? It is quite unnecessary 
to mark the absence of the article by 
ak ‘‘a temple of God’’: ναὸς 
Θεοῦ has become anarthrous, as a quasi- 
technical phrase, and in the Apostle’s 
thought there is only one such Temple, 
which is built up by the whole body of 
believers (see reff.).—hpeis yap κ.τ.λ.: 
Sor we are the Temple of a God who is 
alive (see τοῦ); note that ζῶντος as the 
emphatic word is placed last.—xa€ds 
εἶπεν ὁ Θεὸς x.1-A.: as God said, “1 will 
dwell in them (these words are only a 
paraphrase of Lev. xxvi. 11; the quota- 
tion begins with ver. 12) and walk in 
them, and I will be their God, and they 
shall be My people” (cf. Exod. vi. 7, Jer. 
xxxi. 33, Ezek. xi. 20, Zech. viii. 8, xiii. 
9, etc., where the promise is reiterated). 
Several passages of the O.T., viz., Lev. 
xxvi. 12, Isa. lii. rr, Ezek. xx. 34 and 2 
Sam. vii. 14 are here combined; and it is 
worth noticing that the first, second and 
fourth of these are marked as distinct quo- 
tations by the introductory formule which 
precede them in the O.T. in each case, 
viz., καθὼς εἶπεν ὁ Θεός from Lev. xxvi. 
12, λέγει Κύριος from Isa. lii. 5 (or Ezek. 
xx. 33), and λέγει Κύριος παντοκράτωρ, 
from 2 Sam. vii. 8. ἢ 


80 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B Vil. 
a Rom. xii. 4 ay “ἢ i a » ΄ 
erica, ΚΠ]. 1. Ταύτας οὖν ἔχοντες τὰς ἐπαγγελίας, " ἀγοκητοῖς "καϑαρί. 
x14, XV. σωμεν ἑαυτοὺς ἀπὸ παντὸς “μολυσμοῦ σαρκὸς καὶ πνεύματος, 
55, chap. τ 
xii.19; 4 ἐπιτελοῦντες "ἁγιωσύνην ἐν ᾿ φόβῳ * Ocod. 
Phil. ii. ὶ eet ὶ 4 : ‘ : 
jaiv.t 2. δΧωρήσατε ἡμᾶς" οὐδένα ἠδικήσαμεν, οὐδένα ” ἐφθείραμεν, 
ο “ν, 26; τὰ 
Tit. ii. 14 only in Paul. c Here only; Jer. xxiii. 15; 1 Esdras viii. 33; 2 Macc. v. 27 only; cf. 
Cor. viii. 7. ἃ Rom. xv. 28; chap. viii. 6,11; Gal. iii. 3; Phil. i. 6. e Rom. i. 4 I 
iii. 13 only. f Rom, iii. 18 only (Ps. xxxv. 2); Isa. xi. 3; ¢f. chap. v. 11. g Gen. xiii. 6; John 
ii. 6. h 1 Cor. iii. 17, xv. 33; chap. xi. 3; Eph. iv. 22. 


Ver. 17. διὸ ἐξέλθετε net-A.: where- 
fore, “Come out from among them and 
be separate,”’ saith the Lord, “" «nd touch 
not an unclean thing and I will receive 
you.” So, too, the Heavenly Voice of 
the Apocalypse cried ‘‘ Come out of her” 
to those who were in danger of con- 
tamination with the sins of pagan Rome 
(Rev. xviii. 4). But the command must 
not be misapplied. St. Peter was wrong 
in ‘separating’ himself from his Gentile 
brethren (Gal. ii, 12), as he was wrong 
in calling that “unclean” which God 
had cleansed (Acts x. 14). And St. Paul 
never counsels any at Corinth to ‘‘sepa- 
rate’’ himself from the body of his fellow 
Christians on account of their sinful 
lives. (1 Cor. v. 13 is a direction to the 
Church to excommunicate a sinful mem- 
ber, a quite different thing.) To the 
Apostle separation from heathendom was 
imperative, but separation from the 
Christian Church was a schism and a 
sin. 

Ver. 18. καὶ ἔσομαι «.T.A.:.and “I 
will be to you a Father, and ye shall be 
to Me sons and daughters,” saith the Lord 
Almighty. The ideal relation of Israel 
to Jehovah was that of a son to a father 
(Exod. iv. 22, Jer. xxxi. 9, Hos. i. 10); 
but the full meaning of such words was 
reserved for Him to teach who came to 
reveal the Father (Matt. xi. 27), as their 
full blessedness can be realised only by 
the heir of the Father’s kingdom who 
“‘overcomes”’ at last (Rev. xxi. 7). 

CHAPTER VII.—Ver. 1. ταύτας οὖν 
ἔχοντες «tA: having therefore these 
(note the emphasis given to ταύτας by 
its position) promises, beloved, let us 
cleanse ourselves from all contamination 
7, “ae and spirit (cf. τ Pet. ii. x1, 1 

ohn iii.°3). We find the construction 
καθαρίζειν ἀπό again in Ecclus. xxxviii. 
ro and Heb. ix, 14 (see also Deissmann, 
Neue Bibelstud., p. 44). We have already 
pointed out (on vi. 14) that μολυσμός is 
always used of the defilement which 
springs out of evil (and especially heathen) 
associations; this may affect the πνεῦμα 
(see on ii, 13) as well as the odpt.— 
ἐπιτελοῦντες ἁγιωσύνην κιτιλ.: perfecting 


holiness in the fear of God, sc., the fear 
that man ought to feel towards God (see 
v. 11), which is, indeed, one of the gifts 
of the Divine Spirit (Isa. xi. 3), and 
which was repeatedly commended to the 
chosen people (Deut. vi. 2, Ps. cxi. 1). 
The practical issue of belief in the 
promises of the Old Covenant (which 
have a yet larger meaning under the 
New) is positive as well as negative, 
sanctification as well as separation. St. 
Paul’s word for man’s sanctification is 
ἁγιασμός, the result of which process is 
here expressed by ἁγιωσύνη (see reff.) ; 
this is especially an attribute of God in 
the O.T. (Pss. xcv. 6, xcvi. 12, cxliv. 5, 
2 Macc. iii. 12). 

Vv. 2-4. HE CLAIMS THEIR Sym- 
PATHY AGAIN. He now resumes the 
appeal which is interrupted at vi. 13 by 
the parenthetical warning vi. 14-vii. 1. 
—Ver. 2. χωρήσατε ἡμᾶς x.t-Ae: make 
room for us, sc., in your hearts, #.¢., let 
there be no στενοχωρία (vi. 12); we 
wronged no man, we corrupted no man, 
we took advantage ofno man. Apparently 
accusations of this sort had been laid to 
his charge (see esp. chap. xii. 16, 17), 
and he is, as ever (chap. ii. 17, Acts xx. 
33), careful to assert their baselessness. 
It is an excessive refinement of exegesis 
which finds here distinct charges hinted 
at in the three words ἠδικήσαμεν, ἐφθεί- 
papev, ἐπλεονεκτήσαμεν. They are used 
quite generally, the only one that offers. 
any ambiguity being the second, φθείρειν 
often (see reff.), though not always, . 
carrying a reference to bodily defile- 
ment through lust; here (as at 1 Cor. iii. 
17) it seems to connote injury of any sort. 

Ver. 3. πρὸς κατάκρ. κιτ.λο: 1 do not 
say this by way of condemnation (i.e., do 
not think that I accuse you of mistrusting 
me); for I have said before (viz., in iil. 
2, vi. 11) that ye are in our hearts (cf. 
Phil. i. 7) to die together and to live to- 
gether (cf. i. 6), t.e., your image is in my 
heart in life and in death, Where there 
is such a wealth of sympathy as this, 
there can be no thought of “ condemna- 
tion”, Wetstein gives a good verbal 
parallel from Athenzus (vi., 249), τούτονς 








call γς "3 > 
τ τ oe ee 


a5 ano a 
ΕΑ ΤΩΣ oot eae 


a 
oe 


oy 


I—7. 


οὐδένα | ἐπλεονεκτήσαμεν. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 81 


3. ob! πρὸς " κατάκρισιν λέγω - | προεί- | Ref. il, ταὶ 


k Chap. iii. 


pyka yap ὅτι ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν ἐστε εἰς τὸ "συναποθανεῖν, GON. i: 


καὶ ” συΐζῇν. 


καύχησις ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν: πεπλήρωμαι τῇ παρακλήσει, “ ὑπερπερισ- 
σεύομαι TH* χαρᾷ ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ "θλίψει ἡμῶν. 
ἡμῶν εἰς Μακεδονίαν, οὐδεμίαν ἔσχηκεν δ "ἄνεσιν ἡ σὰρξ ἡμῶν, 
ἀλλ᾽ "ἐν "παντὶ “θλιβόμενοι 7: ἔξωθεν μάχαι, ἔσωθεν φόβοι. 


4. πολλή μοι “ παῤῥησία πρὸς ὃ ὑμᾶς, πολλή μοι 2 


m Mk. xiv. 
31; 2 Tim. 

+ yao ἐλθού = 11 only. 
. κα ούντων π Rom. vi. 

Ἢ ROTOR 8; 2 Tim. 
ii. 11 only. 

© Reff. iii.12. 

6. p Ref. i. 12. 

q Rom. v. 


GAN’ ὁ “παρακαλῶν τοὺς “ταπεινοὺς παρεκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς 20 only. 


τ Reff, i. 4. 


ἐν τῇ “ παρουσίᾳ Titov: 7. *ob * μόνον " δὲ ὃ ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ αὐτοῦ, s Ref. ii. 1 


t Reff. iv. 


"ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῇ παρακλήσει ἡἣ παρεκλήθη ἐφ᾽ ὑμῖν, ἀναγγέλλων εἶ aes 


ἡμῖν " τὴν ὑμῶν 7 ἐπιπόθησιν, τὸν ὑμῶν * ὀδυρμὸν, τὸν ὑμῶν " ζῆλον 
29; Lk. i. 52; Rom. xii. 16; chap. x. 1; Jas. i. 9. iv. 6; 1 Pet. v. 5 only. 


x. 10; Phil. i. 26, ii. 12. 
reff. v. 2. 
xi. 2; Phil. iii. 6; Col. iv. 13. 


x Rom. v. 3, M, Viii. 23, ix. 10; chap. viii. 19, etc. 
z Matt. ii, 18 (Jer. xxxi. 15); 2 Macc. xi. 6 only. 


13; see 
reff. i. 4. 
v Matt. xi. 
w 1 Cor, xvi. 17; chap. 
ἵ Ver. 11 only; οἵ. 


a Rom. x. 2; chaps. vii. 11, ix. 2, 


lov προς κατακρ. is the order of DEGKL, etc.; better προς xataxp. ov with 


NWECP. 
2B om. eore. 


4 Β has ev ty xapq- 


5 D*E, d, e and the Peshitto have προς υμας ἐστιν. 
δ After πασῃ ty D*E* have πολλῃ- 


8 S$CDELP have ecxyxev; BGK have eoyev; CG and the Syriac vss. put ἐσχ-: 


after aveoiv. 
7D*, d, e give θλιβομενος. 
"ἘΠ" have avayy. vpuy. 


δ᾽ of βασιλεῖς ἔχουσι συζῶντας καὶ συν- 
αποθνησκόντας. 

Ver. 4. πολλή μοι παρρησία κ-.τ.λ.: 
great ts my boldness of speech towards 
you (cf. vi. 11), great ts my glorying on 
your behalf, sc., on account of the good 
news of their conduct ᾷ i. 14, iii. 2), J 
am filled with comfort or the constr. cf. 
Luke ii. 40, Rom. i. 29, 2 Macc. vii. 21), 
$c., with the comfort (note the article 
which Titus had brought, I overflow wit 
joy (cf. Phil. ii. 17, Col. i. 24) sn all our 
affliction (see vi. 10). 

Vv. 5-12. HE WAS COMFORTED TO 
LEARN FROM TITUS THAT HIS REBUKE 
HAD BEEN PROFITABLE. Cf. throughout 
1 Thess. iii. 1-8, a passage strikingly like 
this in its human sympathy and kindli- 
ness.—Ver. 5. καὶ yap ἐλθόντων k-T.A. : 
for even when we were come into Mace- 
donia (he has explained in ii. 12 his 
anxiety when he was at Troas, but it 
remained with him even when he had 
crossed into Europe) our flesh had no 
relief (see note on the similar phrase, ii. 
13), but [we were] afflicted on every side. 
Note the anacoluthon, the participle θλι- 
Bépevor being used as if it were a finite 
verb (cf. v. 12 for a like constr.).—é&w@ev 
μάχαι κ-τ.λ.: without were fightings, sc., 

VOL, III. 


8 G, g and the Peshitto omit δὲ after povoy, 


with adversaries (cf. 1 Cor. xv. 32), with- 
in were fears, sc., the anxieties which the 
Apostle would feel for his converts, 
especially those at Corinth (cf. chap. xi. 
28). It will be noticed that the familiar 
cadence ‘‘fightings within and fears 
without” is a misquotation. 

Ver. 6. ἀλλ᾽ ὁ παρακαλῶν κ.τ.λ.: but 
He that comforteth the lowly (see ref. 
Isa.), even God (to whom he is especially 
careful in this Epistle to trace up all 
grace and consolation), comforted us by 
the coming of Titus. wapovoia is often 
used for the Advent of Christ, but also 
(see reff.) for the advent of St. Paul or 
his companions, This is the first explicit 
mention of St. Paul’s meeting with Titus 
in Macedonia (but cf. ii. 13) which was 
the occasion of the letter being written. 

Ver. 7. οὐ μόνον δὲ κιτιλ.: and not 
by his coming only, but also (see reft. for 
constr.) by the comfort wherewith he 
was comforted in respect of you (cf. τ 
Thess. iii. 7 for constr.), i.e, ‘1 was 
comforted, not only by his coming, but 
by the good news which he brought”’; 
while he told us your longing, sc., to see 
me, your mourning, sc., at the rebuke 
which I sent you, your zeal on my behalf. 
ζῆλος may either mean “ zeal,’’ in a good 


82 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B 


VIL. 


b Matt. xxi. ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ, ὥστε pe? μᾶλλον χαρῆναι. 8. Ὅτι εἰ καὶ ἐλύπησα ὑμᾶς 


30, 32 
Heb. vii. 


ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ,2 oF? " μεταμέλομαι, εἰ 5 καὶ μετεμελόμην - βλέπω 


a1(Ps.cix. γὰρ 4 ὅτι ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐκείνη, εἰ καὶ “ πρὸς “ ὥραν, ἐλύπησεν ὅ ὑμᾶς. 


4) only. 


c John v.35; 9. Νῦν χαίρω, οὐχ ὅτι ἐλυπήθητε, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἐλυπήθητε εἰς μετάνοιαν" 


Gal. ii. 5; 


cf. 1 
Thess. ii. 


17. 

d Acts xx. 
21, XXVi. 
20; Rom. 
ii. 4; ver. 


1032 Tim. 5) ἃ φόβον, ἀλλὰ “ ἐπιπόθησιν, ἀλλὰ “ ζῆλον, GAN’ "ἐκδίκησιν. 


ἐλυπήθητε γὰρ “ κατὰ " Θεὸν, ἵνα fév μηδενὶ © ζημιωθῆτε ἐξ ἡμῶν. 
10. ἡ γὰρ κατὰ Θεὸν λύπη μετάνοιαν εἰς σωτηρίαν ἢ ἀμεταμέλητον 
κατεργάζεται δ: ἡ δὲ τοῦ κόσμου λύπη θάνατον * κατεργάζεται. 
ἰδοὺ γὰρ " αὐτὸ " τοῦτο τὸ κατὰ Θεὸν λυπηθῆναι ὑμᾶς, πόσην κατειρ- 
γάσατο 8 ὑμῖν" ' σπουδὴν, ἀλλὰ " ἀπολογίαν, ἀλλὰ " ἀγανάκτησιν, 


11. 


4“ ἐν 


ii. 25; οἵ. 

a ates 4 παντὶ "συνεστήσατε * ἑαυτοὺς " ἁγνοὺς εἶναι ἡ ἐν 10 τῷ ᾿ πράγματι. 
¢ Sion vith 27; Eph. iv. 24; cf.chap.xi.17. ΓΕ Reff. vi. 3. g 1 Cor. iii. 15; Phil. iii, 8 
h Rom. xi. 29 only. i Reff. iv. 17. k Reff. ii. 3. 1 Rom. xii. 8, 11; ver. 12; chap. viii. 7, 8, 16, 
m 1 Cor. ix. 3; Phil. i. 7, 16; 2 Tim. iv. 16. n Here only; c/. Mk. x. 14. o Reff. ver. 7. p Rom. 

xii, το (Deut. xxxii. 35); 2 Thess. i. 8 (Isa. Ixvi. 15. q Reff.iv.8. τ Reff.iv.2. 5 Chap. xi 


2; Phil. iv. 8; 1 Tim. v. 22; Tit. ii. 5; cf. vi. 6. 


t 1 Thess. iv. 6, 


1 DE have μαλλον pe; G μαλλον χαρηναι pe; K om. με. 
2 After εἐπιστ. D*EG, d, e, f, g add pov and the Harclean adds pov πρωτῃ- 


8 B has εἰ Se και. 


4 BD*, d, e, vg. om. yap; Lachmann and Hort think that vg. (videns) has alone 
preserved the true reading, véz., βλέπων (see note below). 


5 G, f, g, vg. have up. ελυπησεν. 


6 SecGKL give katepyalerar; better (here) epyaferar with S*BCDEP, 

7 ScDEKLP, d, e, vg. read vpas; better om. with S9*BCG 17, g. 

8 sSB°CGKLP have κατειργασατο; B*DE have κατηργασατο. 

9 S9cCGP, f, g, vg. and the Syriac give ev upiv; om. ev $*BDEKL, 

10 DbcEKLP, d, e give ev te mpayp.; better om. ev with BCD*G, f, g, harsh 


though the resulting constr. is. 


sense, as here (see reff.), or ‘‘ jealousy,” 
in a bad sense (see reff. xii. 20).---ὦὧστε 
pe μᾶλλον χαρῆναι: so that I rejoiced yet 
more, sc., than at the mere coming of 
Titus with his news (cf. ver. 13). 

Ver. 8. ὅτι εἰ καὶ ἐλύπησα x.t-d.: 
for though I made you sorry with my 
epistle (sc., esp. 1 Cor. v.; cf. Introd., p. 
14), I do not regret it; though I did 
regret it (for I see that that epistle 
made you sorry, though but for a season), 
yet now I rejoice, etc. We follow the 
punctuation adopted by Tisch., W.H. 
and the American Revisers, the second 
clause softening the apparent harshness 
of the first, and βλέπω γάρ ... ὥραν 
being a parenthetic explanation. 

Ver. 9. viv χαίρω K.T-A.: now, S¢., 
now that Titus is come, and I have 
learnt the effect of my letter, I rejoice, 
not that ye were made sorry, but that ye 
were made sorry unto repentance (of 
which there was no sign when he wrote; 


see x Cor. v. 2), for ye were made sorry 
according to the will of God, sc.,in God’s 
way as contrasted with man’s way (cf. 1 
Cor. xv. 32 and see reff.), so that ye 
might suffer loss by us in nothing, i.e., the 
sorrow caused by my rebuke was divinely 
ordered for your good, so that my severity 
did not hurt but rather benefited you. 
The word μετάνοια occurs curiously 
seldom in St. Paul (see reff.), perhaps 
because it indicates the very first step in 
the religious life, that ‘‘ change of mind” 
as to God which precedes even the re- 
nunciation of sin (see esp. for this use 
reff., Acts and Matt. iii. 2, iv. 17, Acts 
ii, 38, etc.), and this first step his corre- 
spondents had already taken, or his letters 
to them would not have been written. 
Ver. 10. ἡ yap κατὰ Θεὸν λύπη 
«TA: for such godly sorrow, i.e., sorrow 
for sin as an offence against God (Ps. 
1. 6) and not only for the temporal conse- 
quences of sin (cf. Bengel, ‘‘animi Deum 














--τ- or 
’ 


es 





8—13. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 83 


12. dpa εἰ καὶ ἔγραψα ὑμῖν, οὐχ εἵνεκεν τοῦ ἀδικήσαντος,; οὐδὲ ? u Ref. ii. 14. 


ν ΚεΗ͂, iv. 2. 


εἵνεκεν τοῦ ἀδικηθέντος 1 - ἀλλ᾽ εἵνεκεν τοῦ " φανερωθῆναι τὴν ' σπου- w τ Cor. 


δὴν ὃ ὑμῶν τὴν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς ὑμᾶς "ἐνώπιον τοῦ “Θεοῦ. 
a ‘ ‘ - , ΓΕ ee | 6 7 

τοῦτο παρακεκλήμεθα ἐπὶ τῇ παρακλήσει ὑμῶν 5: περισσοτέρως S€° x See o 

μᾶλλον ἐχάρημεν ἐπὶ τῇ χαρᾷ Τίτου, ὅτι “ ἀναπέπαυται τὸ * πνεῦμα 


1 D*E have αδικηθεντος . - - αδικησαντος. 


8 G (not ΕἾ, d*, g give σπουδὴν ἡμων. 


xvi. 18; 
13. Διὰ Philm. 


, 20. 


ὁ χα 


3 ΝΒ, 37, 73 have add’ ουδε. 
*ND*F have νπερ υμων. 


5 FKL, the Bohairic and Harclean support wapaxA. vpwv; better μων with 


NSBCDEGP, vg. and Peshitto. 


6 All the uncials place δε, not before μαλλον, but between em and ry παρακλησει. 


spectantis et sequentis ”), worketh repent- 
ance which leads tosalvation, arepentance 
which bringeth no regret. ἀμεταμέλητον 
may be taken with σωτηρία (see ΚΕΝ. 
margin), but there would be no point in 
applying such an adj. to σωτηρία, where- 
as it is quite apposite as applied to 

ετάνοια (as by Chrys., R.V., etc.).—4 
δὲ τοῦ κόσμον K.-T. : but the sorrow of 
the world, sc., such sorrow as the world 
feels—for failure, not for sin— worketh 
out death, sc., as opposed to σωτηρία (cf. 


chap. ii. 16). 

ee, 11. ἰδοὺ yap αὐτὸ κιτι.λ.: for 
behold, this same thing, viz., that you 
were made sorry after a godly sort, what 
diligence it wrought in you, yea (sc., “ not 
only so, but also,” ἀλλά introducing an 
accessory idea) what a defence, sc., of 
yourselves to me through the mediation 
of Titus, yea what indignation, yea what 
fear, sc., of St. Paul’s rebukes, yea what 
longing, sc., that he should come to them 
(see ver. 7), yea what zeal, sc., on behalf 
of God and righteousness, yea what 
avenging, sc., the heavy punishment 
solemnly inflicted on the offender in God’s 
name (chap. ii. 6). Observe that ἐκδί- 
Knows and ἐκδικέω are always (see reff. 
and Luke xviii. 7, 1 Pet. ii. 14, etc.) used 
of God’s avenging of sin, not of man’s 
retaliation.—év παντὶ κιτιλ.: i every- 
thing ye approved yourselves to be pure 
in the matter, i.e., not that they were 
quite free from gross sins of the flesh (see 
xii, 21), but that by their ready compli- 
ance with the Apostle’s directions they 
had cleared themselves from the guilt of 
connivance at incest (see ii. 6). τῷ 
πράγματι (the dat. of regard) is a vague 
phrase used here and at 1 Thess. iv. 6 to 
denote abominable wickedness. 

Ver. 12. ἄρα εἰ καὶ ἔγραψα x.7.A.: 
consequently, although I wrote to you, i.e., 
wrote a severe letter, it was not for his 
cause that did the wrong, sc., the inces- 


tuous son of 1 Cor. v. 1, nor for his cause 
that suffered the wrong, sc., his father, 
but that your diligence on our behalf 
might be made manifest to yourselves 
(‘chez vous,” so πρὸς ὑμᾶς, 1 Thess. 
ili. 4) in the sight of God. He does not 
mean that this was the only reason for 
writing (cf. ii. 9), and that the more 
obvious reason was not in his mind; but 
he states strongly (expressing himself by 
an idiom common in the O.T., ¢.g., Jer. 
vii. 22) a principal cause of his writing, 
viz., that the Corinthian Church might 
be recalled to a true sense of what was 
due to its founder, as if it were the 
only cause. See on ii. 9, and, for a 
discussion of the whole question, see 
Introd., p. 10 ff. 

Ver. 13. διὰ τοῦτο παρακεκλ.: where- 
fore we have been comforted. With 
Tisch., W.H. and modern editors gene- 
rally we place a full stop here. What 
follows introduces a new idea. 

Vv. 13-16. THE Joy or ΤΙΤΟΒ IN 
THE TIDINGS HE BROUGHT. Chrysostom 
notes the tact which leads St. Paul to 
communicate this so emphatically ; Titus 
was going back to Corinth on the busi- 
ness of the collection (viii. 6, 16, 23), and 
it was very desirable that he should be 
well received there.—émt δὲ τῇ παρα- 
κλήσει ἡμῶν περισσοτέρως μᾶλλον k.T.A.: 
and in addition to this comfort of ours we 
rejoiced the more exceedingly (cf. ver. 7, 
and for the double comparative cf. Mark 
vii. 36, Phil. i. 23) αὐ (for the constr. 
χαίρειν ἐπὶ cf. τ Cor. xiii. 6, xvi. 17, etc.) 
the joy of Titus, because his spirit hath 
been refreshed by you all (cf. the some- 
what similar use of ἀπό in chap. ii. 3, 
Matt. xi. 19, Acts ii. 22). Both here and 
at ver. I5 πάντων is emphasised by its 
position before ὑμῶν; Titus was well 
received by all at Corinth, and it seems 
to be implied at xii. 18 that he left a 
favourable impression upon them all, 


84 


y 1 Cor. i. 
27, Xi. 4, 5, 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B 


αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ πάντων ὑμῶν" 14. 


Vil ie ς 4——16. 


ὅτι εἴ τι αὐτῷ ὑπὲρ ' ὑμῶν κεκαύχημαι, 


22; chap. οὐ " κατῃσχύνθην - ἀλλ᾽ ὡς πάντα " ἐν ἀληθείᾳ ἐλαλήσαμεν ὑμῖν, ὃ 
z οή 1, χα, οὕτω καὶ ἡ " καύχησις ἡμῶν “ ἡ ὃ ἐπὶ ὁ Τίτου ἀλήθεια ἐγενήθη "15. 


a Reff. vi.12. 


bx Cor.iv. καὶ τὰ "σπλάγχνα αὐτοῦ περισσοτέρως εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐστιν, " ἀναμιμνη- 


17;2 ε 
1. 6. 
* 1 Cor. ii. 


3; Eph. ἐδέξασθε αὐτόν. 
Vi. 5; 
Phil. ii. ra; Ia. xix. 16. ἀἁ See on iv. 8. 


σκομένου τὴν πάντων ὑμῶν ὑπακοὴν, ds μετὰ “φόβου καὶ “τρόμου 
16. χαίρω ὅτι “ ἐν * παντὶ " θαῤῥῶ ἐν ὑμῖν. 
e Reff, v. 6. 


1 G, g, the Peshitto and Bohairic give the order xex. vi. npwv. 
3 CG, g, the Harclean and Bohairic have wavrore for wavta. 


8 CDEP, ἃ, e, f place υμιν before ev αληθ. 


4 BF have υμων for ἡμων- 


5 48*B om. ἡ before ἐπι (so Tisch. and W.H.). 


5 DEGP have προς Titov. . 


Ver. 14. ὅτι εἴ τι κιτιλ.: for tf in 
anything I have gloried to him on your 
behalf, t.e., have boasted of you (c/. ix. 2, 
xii. 5), I was not put to shame, sc., by the 
vanity of my boasting being exposed; 
but as we spake all things to you in truth 
(this he is continually insisting on, ¢.g., 
at i. 18, ii. 17, iv. 2, etc.), so our gloryin 
also, viz., that made before Trtus cf. 
Mark xiii. 9 for ἐπί with the gen.), was 
found (not “15 found” as A.V., but “ was 
found” as at x Cor. i. 30) to be truth. 

Ver. 15. καὶ τὰ σπλάγχνα «.T.A. 
and his heart is more abundantly towards 
you, while he recalls to himself the obedi- 
ence of you all, how with fear (see reff. 
and cf. Matt. xxviii. 8, 1 Pet. iii. 15, for 
μετὰ φόβου) and trembling you received 
him. He had brought a stern message, 
which involved the excommunication of 
the unworthy member (1 Cor. v. 5); it 
was no wonder that they trembled at his 
coming. 

Ver, 16. χαίρω ὅτι κ-.τιλ.: I rejoice 
that in everything I am of good courage 
(not as A.V. “ I have confidence,” which 
would be πέποιθα) concerning you. 

II. The Collection for Se 
Christians (viii. 1-ix. 15). e have 
now come to the second main topic of 
the Epistle, viz., the collection to be made 
at Corinth, as in all the Christian com- 
munities which the Apostle had founded, 
on behalf of the poor Christians at Judea 
(chaps. viii. and ix.). We first hear of 
this great undertaking at 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 
but it is plain from that passage as well 
as from 2 Cor. viii. 10, ix. 2, that it had 
been organised some time before 1 Cor. 
was written. (See Introd., p. 6.) The 
poverty of the Christians at Jerusalem, 
however caused, was evidently acute ; and 
when St, Paul first parted from the Twelve 


7 RQ* om. παντων.- 


on his mission to the Gentiles, one of 
the stipulations made with him was that 
he should ‘‘remember the poor” (Gal. 
ii, 10), This stipulation he faithfully 
observed, and it was to convey the 
money thus entrusted to him to its 
proper recipients that he paid his last 
visit to Jerusalem (Acts xxiv. 17). See 
further the excellent discussion in Stan- 
ley’s note on 1 Cor. xvi. 1. 

Chap. viii. vv. 1-7. THE LIBERALITY 
OF THE MACEDONIAN CHURCHES—AN 


:. EXAMPLE TO CORINTH.—Ver. 1. Γνωρί- 


ἴομεν δὲ ὑμῖν κιτιλ.: moreover (for this 
is the force of the δὲ μεταβατικόν, mark- 
ing the transition to a new subject; ¢f. 
1 Cor. vii. 1, viii. 1, xv. 1, Chap. x 1, 
etc.), brethren, we make known to you 
the grace of God, sc., the special grace of 
liberality in giving, which has been given 
in, t.¢., given to and exhibited in (see on 
i. 22), the Churches of Macedonia, ¢.g., 
Philippi, Thessalonica and Bercea (Acts 
xvi, and xvii.), which places we may 
presume he revisited on this journey. 
Ver. 2. ὅτι ἐν πολλῇ δοκιμῇ «.7.A.: 
how that in much proof of affliction, i.e., 
in spite of the severe afflictions by which 
they were tried, probably a reference to 
persecution and annoyance from their 
heathen neighbours (see Acts xvi. 20, 
Phil. i. 28, 1 Thess. i. 6, ii. 14, iii. 3-9), 
the abundance of their joy and their deep 
poverty (κατὰ βάθους = “reaching deep 
down ”’; cf. the phrase in Strabo, ix., 419, 
ἄντρον κοῖλον κατὰ βάθους) abounded 
unto the riches of their liberality. ἁπλοῦς 
means primarily ‘simple,” ‘“single- 
minded” (Matt. vi. 22), and ἁπλότης is 
thus used by St. Paul in chap. xi. 3, 
Eph. vi. 5, Col. iii. 22; but single- 
mindedness or “heartiness” of giving 
(see τ Chron, xxix. 17) involves ‘‘liber- 








to the givin idow’s mi 
xii. 44). Itis noteworthy that no warn- 


- 


VIII. 1—6. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


85 


VIII. 1. FNQPIZOMEN δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοὶ, τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὴν ἃ Ref i 


δεδομένην ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Maxedoviag: 2. ὅτι ἐν πολλῇ 
"δοκιμᾷ "θλίψεως ἡ “περισσεία τῆς χαρᾶς αὐτῶν καὶ ἡ κατὰ βάθους 
“πτωχεία αὐτῶν ἐπερίσσευσεν εἰς tiv! πλοῦτον τῆς " ἁπλότητος ὁ Ver 9: 
αὐτῶν: 3. ὅτι κατὰ δύναμιν, *paptupd, καὶ ὑπὲρ 3 δύναμιν " αὐθαί- : 
ρετοι, 4. μετὰ πολλῆς παρακλήσεως δεόμενοι ἡμῶν, τὴν χάριν καὶ 
τὴν "ἢ κοινωνίαν τῆς διακονίας τῆς εἰς τοὺς ' ἁγίους δέξασθαι ὃ ἡμᾶς " 
5. καὶ οὐ καθὼς ἠλπίσαμεν," ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτοὺς ἔδωκαν πρῶτον τῷ Κυρίῳ, 
καὶ ἡμῖν " διὰ " θελήματος "Θεοῦ" 6. εἰς τὸ παρακαλέσαι ἡμᾶς 
Τίτον, ἵνα, καθὼς ' προενήρξατο," οὕτω καὶ ™ ἐπιτελέσῃ εἰς ὑμᾶς καὶ ἢ 


g Ver. 17 only. h Reff. vi. 14. 


iv. 13. 
m Ref vii. x. 


c Rom. v. 


17; chap 
X.15; Jas. 
only, 


9 
only. — 
e Rom. xii. 


Col 


15; ¥ 
i Reff, i. 1. k Reff. i, x. 1 Ver, 10 only 


18§SDEGKL support τὸν wAovrov; better ro πλουτος with N*BCP τ (cf. the 


same variant Eph. i. 7, ii. 7, iii. 8, 16, Phil. iv. το, Col. ii. 2; in later Gree 


there is 


a tendency towards the neuter form; see crit. note on ix. 2). 
3 KLP give vaep Suv. ; better παρα with NBCDEG. 
5 δεξασθαι npas is not found in the uncials and primary vss. ; it-is a mere explana-. 


tory gloss. 
* B 73 have nAmiucapev. 


ality” in giving (cf. ix. 7), and thus in 
many passages (see reff. and cf. Jas. i. 
5) liberality is the best rendering. The 
whole of Greece, except the Roman 
colonies of Patrae and Corinth, was m 
a dire condition of poverty and distress 
at this period (see Arnold’s Roman 
Commonwealth, ii., 382, quoted by Stan- 
ley); and the_ ibuti 


ings against the temptations of wealth 


δ B has evnpgaro (cf. ver. 10). 


such charitable service (cf. Acts vi. 1, xi. 
29, Rom. xv. 25, 31, chap. ix. 1, 12, etc.), 
a prima t i 
administration of alms. 

€f. 5. καὶ ov καθὼς x.t.A.: and not 
(merely) as we hoped, i.e., beyond what we 
expected or hoped, but first (not only in 





order of time, but in order of importance; 





as we say “first of all”) they gave them- 





selves to the Lord. This is not merely 





“the consecration of self (cf. Rom. xii. 1), 


which is the condition of all acceptable 


almsgiving, for this would not have been 
occur in 1 and 2 Thess. or Phil. See, “beyond the _Apostle’s expectations, but 


however, Lightfoot, Bibl. Essays, p. 247. 

Ver. 3. ὅτι κατὰ δύναμιν κ.οτ.λ.: 
for according to their pee I bear wit- 
ness, yea and beyond their power, Field 
quotes a good parallel from Josephus, 
Antt., iii., 6.1, who has κατὰ δύναμιν. .. 
παρὰ δύναμιν as here. 

Vv.3, 4. αὐθαίρετοι μετὰ πολλ. wap- 
ak. K.T.A.: of thety own accord begging 
of us with much entreaty (the constr. is 
clumsy but perhaps unbroken; we should 
expect ἔδωκαν after αὐθαίρετοι, but the 
verb is found in ver. 5) the favour, sc., of 
giving (cf., for this sense of χάρις, Acts 
xxiv. 27, xxv. 3, Ecclus. xxx. 6), and the 
participation in the ministering to the 





the devotion of personal service in the 








work of spreading the Gospel, such as 
was given by Sopater of Ber ris- 

Sand Secundus of Thessalonica 
(Acts xx. 4), and Epaphroditus of Philippi 
(Phil. ii. 25). Other Macedonian Chris- 
tians who are named as helpers of St. 
Paul are Jason (Acts xvii. 5 f.) and Gaius 
Acts xix. 29); possibly Demas also (Philm. 
24, 2 Tim. iv. 10) was of Thessalonica, and 
it has been argued that St. Luke was of 
Philippi (see Ramsay, St. Paul the 
Traveller, p. 202).---καὶ ἡμῖν διὰ Ged. 
Θεοῦ: and to us (some of them were St. 
Paul’s companions in travel) by the will 
of |God. Everywhere in St. Paul’s writ- 





Saints, sc., the poor Christians in Judea. _ings the impulse to faithful service is 


+_The Macedonian Christi di 
asked to give; they asked 
allow vilege of giving (cf. Acts 


XX. 35). διακονία is the regular word for 





it. traced up to God’s grace. 





Vv. 6,7. εἰς τὸ παρακαλέσαι κ.τ.λ.: 
so that we exhorted Titus (the epistolary 
aor. infin. ; this is the exhortation to Titus 


86 


n See on iv. τὴν χάριν ταύτην. 


ο Rom. i. 
29; 1 Cor. 


i.5; chap. ἀγάπῃ, ἵνα καὶ ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ χάριτι περισσεύητε." 


xii. 12; 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPIN@IOYS B 


VIII. 


η. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ὥσπερ "ἐν " παντὶ weprocedete,’ πίστει 3 
καὶ λόγῳ καὶ γνώσει καὶ “ πάσῃ " σπουδῇ, καὶ τῇ ἐξ ὑμῶν ὃ ἐν ἡμῖν 


8. οὐ “ κατ᾽ 


Eph. i. 3, ἃ ἐπιταγὴν λέγω, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ὅ ἑτέρων " σπουδῆς καὶ τὸ τῆς ὑμετέ- 


p Reff. vii. 
11. 

q Rom. xvi. 
26; 1 Cor. 
vii. 6; 1 i 
Tim. i. 1; Tit. i. 3. 
xiii. 5; Gal. vi. 4; 1 Thess v. 21. 
ii.4; 1 Tim. vi. 17. 


1 CP have περισσενήῆτε. 


r Phil. iv. 3; 1 Tim. i. 2; Tit. i. 4 only. 
t Here only; Ps. xxxiii. 11; cf. chap. v* ro, ete. 


pas ἀγάπης * γνήσιον " δοκιμάζων ὃ - 9. γινώσκετε γὰρ Thy χάριν τοῦ 
Κυρίου ἡμῶν ἸΙησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὅτι δι᾿ ὑμᾶς ὃ * ἐπτώχευσε * πλούσιος 


81 Cor. xi. 28; ver. 22; chap. 
v Eph, 


789 has ev more. 


3 εξ ὑμῶν ev ἡμῖν, NCDEGKLP, the Latin and Harclean vss., which gives the 
sense more agreeable to the context; B, the Peshitto and Bohairic give εξ μων ev 
vptv, which is preferred by W.H. and R.V. marg. (cf. the variants in vil. 12). 


4“ D*E*G have περισσευσητε- 
8 D*G have δοκιμαΐζω. 


on his meeting with St. Paul in Mace- 
donia after accomplishing his first Mission 
to Corinth; παρακαλ. is the word used 
throughout of the Apostle’s directions to 
Titus; see viii. 17, ix. 5, xii. 17, and on 
chap. i. 4), that as he made a beginning 
fe La sc., in the matter o ion, 

uring the Mission from which he has 


now returned, s0_he_would_also_com- 
plete in you this grace also, i.e., the 
grace of liberal giving in addition to the 
graces of repentance and goodwill which 
rejoiced him so much to observe (vii. 13, 
14). ἐπιτελεῖν is to bring to a successful 
issue a work already begun; see v. 11 
below.—GAX’ ὥσπερ x.t.A.: yea rather 
(ὥσπερ having an ascensive force as at 
i. 9, Vv. 7 being strictly parallel to and 
explanatory of v. 6) that as ye abound 
(cf. 1 Cor. xv. 58) in everything (so he 
had said of the Corinthians in 1 Cor, i. 
5, ἐν παντὶ ἐπλουτίσθητε), in faith (see 
chap. i. 24 and 1 Cor. xii. 8, where πίστις 
is named as one of the gifts of the Spirit 
exhibited among them), and utterance,i.e., 
the grace of ready exposition of the Gospel 
message, and knowledge, i.e., of Divine 
things (λόγος and γνῶσις are conjoined, 
as here, at 1 Cor. i. 5, and γνῶσις is also 
mentioned with πίστις at x Cor. xii. 8; 
at 1 Cor. viii. 1 he points out with marked 
emphasis that γνῶσις is not comparable 
in importance to ἀγάπη as shown in con- 
descension to a brother’s intellectual 
weakness), and all earnestness (see reff. 
and cf. vii. 11, where he mentions the 
σπουδή that the Corinthians had ex- 
hibited when they received his message 
of reproof), and in your love to us (cf. i. 
11 and viii. 24; the variant reading ἐξ 
ἡμῶν ἐν ὑμῖν would disturb the sense 











7B om. Χριστον. 


5 DE have τὴν er. σπουδην- 
8 CK have δι᾽ nas. 


all through he is speaking of the graces 
of the Corinthians, not of his own),.so 
ye may abound in this grace also (cf. ix. 8). 
The English versions and comm. take 
tva with the subj. here as a periphrasis 
for the imperative, and understand some 
verb like βλέπετε, ‘See that ye abound, 
etc.,” but this usage of tva is unex- 
ampled. We follow Kennedy in taking 
v. 7in close connexion with v. 6, although 
we do not agree with the inferences 
which he draws (2 and 3 Cor., p. 122). 
V. 7 seems ‘‘to have been added by St. 
Paul,” he rightly observes ‘‘to avoid 
any appearance of depreciating the work 
which Titus had already accomplished 
among the Corinthian Christians, by the 
description of it in v. 6 as a beginning’”’. 
Cf. the shrewd remark of Grotius, ‘‘ non 
ignoravit Paulus artem rhetorum, movere 
laudando ”’. 

Vv. 8-15. HE COUNSELS (THOUGH 
HE WILL NOT COMMAND) THAT THEY 
FOLLOW THE EXAMPLE OF THE MACE- 
DONIAN CHURCHES, ACCORDING TO THEIR 
ABILITY. — Ver. 8. οὐ κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν 
λέγω «.1.A.: I speak not by way of com- 
mandment, i.e., I do not give you an 
authoritative and formal command (as I 
might do), but ἱ 


πε ἂς ῥγουμιρ through the 
earnestness of others, sc., the example of 
the Macedonian Churches (ver. 3), the 
enuineness also of your love (ver. 7). 
or the constr. σιον τῆς ἀγάπης 


see on iv. 17. 


Ver. 9. γινώσκετε yap K.T.A.: for ye 
know the grace, i.e., the act of grace, 


y 
our Lord Fesus Christ rich, 
sc., in His pre-existent stat e 
Incarnation, yet for your sakes (cf. Rom. 








xv. 3) He became poor, sc., in that κένωσις 











7—13. ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 87 


ὧν, ἵνα ὑμεῖς TH} ἐκείνου " πτωχείᾳ “ πλουτήσητε. 10. καὶ "γνώμην ¥ Ref ver. 
ἐν τούτῳ " δίδωμι - τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν ἢ συμφέρει, οἵτινες 5 οὐ μόνον τὸ W Rom. x. 


12; 1 Cor. 
ποιῆσαι ὃ ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ θέλειν * προενήρξασθε * * ἀπὸ " πέρυσι" 11. Hy: δι: 
νυνὶ δὲ καὶ τὸ ποιῆσαι ἢ" ἐπιτελέσατε, ὅπως καθάπερ ἡ “προθυμία | ΔΝ τς 
τοῦ > θέλειν, οὕτω καὶ τὸ ἐπιτελέσαι ἐκ τοῦ ἔχειν. 12. Εἰ γὰρ ἡ λας σὰ 


προθυμία “ πρόκειται, καθὸ ἐὰν ὃ ἔχῃ τις, "εὐπρόσδεκτος, οὐ καθὸ οὐκ ἄγον 

ἔχει. 13. οὐ γὰρ ἵνα ἄλλοις ΄ ἄνεσις, ὑμῖν δὲ ὃ " θλῖψις - ἀλλ᾽ ἐξγ 1 Cor. vi 
12, X. 23; 

" ἰσότητος, ἐν τῷ ' νῦν ' καιρῷ τὸ ὑμῶν * περίσσευμα εἰς τὸ ἐκείνων chap. xii 


I. 

z Ver. 6 only. a Chap. ix. 2 only. Ὁ Reff. vii. 1. c Ver. 19, chap. ix. 2; Acts xvii. 11 only. 

d Here only in Paul. ς Reff.vi.2. f Reff.ii.13. g Reff.i.4. bh Col. iv. 1 only. i Rom. iii. 
26, viii. 18, xi. 5 only; Gen. xxx. 20. k Here only in Paul. 


1 DEG have avrov. 2 G, f, g and the Peshitto give ort for ourives. 

3 The Peshitto (mistaking the sense) interchanges ποιησαι and Oedev. 

4 D*G have ἐνηρξασθαι (cf. ver. 6). 

5 BCDcEKP read eav; δ ΠΟΙ, have ay. 

6 ΟἹ], and the Bohairic support tis, but S$ BC*DEGKP and the Latins omit it, 


7 DEG, g add τις after exer 
8 SscDEGKLP, f, g, vg. and the Harclean support vpiv δε; δ "ΒΟ 17, d, e om. δε. 


which the Incarnation involved (Phil. ii. Greek; Deissmann (Neue Bibelstudien, p. 
5, 6), (the aor, marks a def. point of 49) notes its occurrence in a papyrus of 
time, ‘He became poor,” not ‘He was the second cent. B.c., of which the words 
poor’’), in order that ye by His poverty, run: ὅτι εἰσὶν ἐν τῷ κεραμεῖ ἀπὸ πέρυσι 
$.0., His assumption of—man-s_nature, L, ιβ x«.7.X., é.¢., “that twelve drachmae 
might be rich, z.e., in the manifold graces are in the pot from last year”. This 
“Gt the-Incarnation fi Cor. i.5). This parallel is important, as showing that ἀπὸ 
verse is parenthetical, introduced to give πέρυσι does not necessarily mean ‘a 
the highest example of love and self- year_ago”. It must be borne in mind 
sacfi ers; there is nowhere in at St. Paul is writing from Macedonia 
- Paul a more definite statement of his and probably in the month of November, 
belief in the pre-existen ist before Now the Macedonian year, like the 
His Incarnation (cf. John xvii. 5). It has Jewish, began with Sethe so that the 
een that ἐπτώχευσε carries an phrase wou e strictly justifiable, ac- 
allusion to the poverty of the Lord’s cording to the chronological scheme 
earthly life (Matt. viii. 20); but the adopted in the Introd. (p. 13). 


primary reference cannot be to this, for Ver. τὶ. νυνὶ δὲ «.7.A.: but now com- 
the πτωχεία of Jesus Christ by which flete the doing also, that as there was 
































| we are “made rich” is the readiness to will, so there may be also 
Ϊ Thartship and penury of His ene AT the completion in accordance with your 
but the state which He assumed in be- ability: ἐκ τοῦ ἐχεῖν = καθὸ ἄν ἔχῃ of 
i coming man. ver. 12 = pro facultatibus (cf. John iii. 
᾿ Ver. το. καὶ γνώμην κιτιλ.: and here- 34, ἐκ papers and not, as A.V., “ out of 


in I give my opinion, for this (i.e., thathe that which ye have”. 
should offer them an opinion rather than Ver. 12. εἰ yap ἧ προθυμία κ.Ῥτ.λ.: 
give a command in this matter, cf. ix. 2) for if the readiness is there tt is accept- 
ig better, i.e., is morally profitable, for able according as a man has, not accord- 
inasmuch as you (see Rom. 1. 25, 32, ing as he has not ; cf. ix. 7, Mark xii. 43, 
t etc., for οἵτινες = quippe qui) were the and Tobit iv. 8, “‘As thy substance is, 
t to make a beginning last year, sc., give alms of it according to thine abund- 
} ey began to make the collection before ance; if thou have little, be not afraid to 
the Macedonian Churches did (cf. 1 Cor._ give alms according to that little”. 
xvi. I, Chap, ix. 2), not only to do but also Vv. 13,14. οὐ yap ἵνα «.t.X.: for the 
to will, sc., they were beforehand notonly collection is mot made in order that there 


in act, but in intention. ἀπὸ wépvovis _may be relief to others, t.¢., to the Judzan 
' for ἐκ πέρυσι or πρὸ πέρυσι of ciassical Christians, and pressure to you, but by 

















88 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


VIII. 


11 Cor. xvi. ὁστέρημα, 14. ἵνα καὶ τὸ ἔκείνων περίσσευμα γένηται εἷς τὸ ὑμῶν 


17; chaps, 
ix. 12, xi. 
; Phil. 


n Hereonly. 


ὑστέρημα: ὅπως γένηται ἰσότης, 15. καθὼς γέγραπται, ᾿ “ Ὁ τὸ 
πολὺ, οὐκ ἐπλεόνασε - καὶ ὁ τὸ ὀλίγον οὐκ " ἠλαττόνησε ἢ, 
16. °Xdpis δὲ “ τῷ “ Θεῷ τῷ διδόντι τὴν αὐτὴν ἢ σπουδὴν ὑπὲρ 


ο Reff.ii.14. ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ Τίτου - 17. ὅτι τὴν μὲν παράκλησιν ἐδέξατο, 


p Reff. vii. 
II. 
q Ver. 2 


ἃ σπουδαιότερος δὲ ὑπάρχων, " αὐθαίρετος ἐξῆλθε πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 


18. 


ef. Phil "Συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ pet’? αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀδελφὸν, οὗ ὁ ὃ "ἔπαινος ἐν τῷ 


ii. 28; 2 
Tim.i.17 £Ver.gonly. 8 Ver. 22 only. 


t Rom. ii. 29, xiii. 3; 1 Cor. iv. 5; Phil. iv. 8. 


1 89*BCKP, g read διδοντι; δοντι is read by $cDEGL, d, e, f, vg. and the Syriac; 
C and the Bohairic add nev (through misunderstanding the sense). 

3 Tisch. reads τον αδελφον per’ αὐτου with ${*P and the Bohairic; but the rec, 
order is supported by all the other principal MSS. and vss. 


3 F* om. ὁ. 


equality, your abundance at the present 


Ver. 17. ὅτι τὴν μὲν παράκλ. κ-.τ.λ.: 


season being a supply for their want, that for not only did he accept (the epistolary 


their abundance also may prove to be a 


supply for your want, sc., at some future 
time, Feat there may be equality, ἱ.6., 








aorist) our exhortation, sc., of ver. 6, but 
(and this is the proof of his σπουδή) 





“Yeciprocity. There is no thought here 
οἱ Jerusalem giving spiritual benefits in 
return for the material benefits given by 
Corinth (cf. chap. ix. 14 and Rom. xv. 
27); what is meant is that if it ever 
came to the turn of Corinth to be poor, 
then it would be for Jerusalem to con- 
tribute for ker support. Such arr idea as 
“that of the transference of the merits 
of the saints is, of course, quite foreign to 
the context. 

Ver. 15. καθὼς γέγραπται x.t.d.: as 
itis written, sc., in the words of Scripture, 
“ He that gathered (we must understand 
σύλλεξας from Exod. xvi. 17) much had 
nothing over; and he that gathered little 
had no lack,” sc., because each gathered 
enough manna for his own needs and no 
more, That each Christian Church may 











Geing himself very earnest (we are-nat to — 
press the comparative σπουδαιότερος ; 

cf. Acts xvii. 22), it was of his own accord 
that he went forth (epist. aor.) unto you, 
sc., from Macedonia, bearing this letter. 


ὑπάρχων is used (as at Rom. iv. 19, 1 
Cor. xi. 7, chap. xii. 16, Gal. i. 14, Phil. 


ii. 6) instead of ὥν, as expressing not 


merely the fact that Titus was σπουϑαιό- 
tepos, but that this was his habitual 
condition; ‘being, as he is,” would 
convey the sense. 

Ver. 18. συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ «.7.A.: and 
we have sent (the epistolary aorist; cf. 
Acts xxiii. 30, chap. ix. 3, Phil. ii. 28, 
Philm. 12) together with him the brother, 
sc., the brother whom you know (εἶ. 
chap. xii. 18), whose praise in the Gospel, 
i.¢., whose good repute as a labourer in 
the cause of the Gospel (cf. chap. x. 14, 


have paoneh for its necessities, not its Phil. iv. 3, Rom. i. g), is throughout all 
ies, is what St. Paul contem 





desirable possible by mutu 
generosity in giving. 
(ABF) of the LXX in Exod, xvi. 18 has 
τὸ ἔλαττον for τὸ ὀλίγον, which however 
is found as an early correction in A, and 
also in Philo. 

Vv. 16-24. HE COMMENDS TO THEM 
TITUS AND TWO UNNAMED COMPANIONS, 
WHO, BEARING THIS LETTER WITH THEM, 
ARE SENT TO GATHER THE COLLECTION 
AT CORINTH.—Ver. 16, χάρις δὲ τῷ Θεῷ 
κιτιλ,; but thanks be to God, who gives 
(note the pres. tense) ¢o (lit., ‘in’; see 
on i. 22 for constr.) the heart of Titus 
the same earnest care for you, sc., the 
same that I myself feel, 


lates the Churches, t.e., is spread abroad in 


all the Churches through which I have 


e true text passed (cf. 1 Cor. vii. 17, xiv. 33; see 


xi. 28). The Patristic reference (Origen, 
Jerome, etc.) of these words to St. Luke 
is stereotyped in the Collect for St. Luke’s 
Day, but there is hardly room for doubt 
that this is due to a mistaken interpreta- 
tion of εὐαγγέλιον as signifying a written 
Gospel, rather than the “ good news”’ of 
God delivered orally by the first Christian 
preachers. We have no positive data by 
which to determine which of St. Paul’s 
contemporaries is here alluded to. It 
has been argued that as this unnamed 
“brother” is seemingly subordinate to 
Titus, he must not be identified with 








᾿ ἐνώπιον ἀνθρώπων. 22. “Συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ αὐτοῖς τὸν ἀδελφὸν ἡμῶν, xz. 20; 








1 ἀπ Πρ... Ὁ αὖος ee 


ἀντ δα. ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β 89 


εὐαγγελίῳ διὰ πασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν" 19. "od " μόνον δὲ, * ἀλλὰ ἃ Ref. vil.7, 


καὶ " χειροτονηθεὶς ὑπὸ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ¥ συνέκδημος ἡμῶν ' σῦν 2 τῇ 23 001. 


χάριτι ταύτῃ, τῇ διακονουμένῃ ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν πρὸς τὴν αὐτοῦ ὅ τοῦ 29 pond ; 


Κυρίου δόξαν, καὶ " προθυμίαν ὑμῶν “- 20. ὅ στελλόμενοι τοῦτο, μή ν- ὅ. 
τις ἡμᾶς "μωμήσηται ἐν τῇ " ἁδρότητι ταύτῃ τῇ διακονουμένῃ ὑφ᾽. Στ κυ 
ἡμῶν" 21. " προνοούμενοι ὅ καλὰ οὐ μόνον ἐνώπιον Κυρίου, ἀλλὰ καὶ ME Bondy 


x iz al. ii. 12, 

ὃν “ ἐδοκιμάσαμεν ἐν πολλοῖς πολλάκις "σπουδαῖον ὄντα, νυνὶ δὲ Ζ Refl. vi. 3. 
a Here only. 

b Prov. fii. 4. cVer.180nly. dReff.ver.8 ε Reff. ver. 17. 


1 DE add eyevero after npwv. 


2 BCP, f, vg. and the Bohairic (followed by W.H.) read ev for συν, which is found 
in DEGKL, d, e, g and the Syriac vss. 


ὃ s3DbcEK and the Syriac vss. support avrov; BCD*GL, the Latins and Bohairic 
omit it. 

4 vpwv after wpo8. is found in F and a few cursives only; ἡμῶν is read by all the 
principal uncials and vss. 


5 KL support προνοουμενοι kaka; C 17, 73 and Bohairic give mpov. yap «ala; 
better προνοουμεν yap καλα with the other uncials and vss. 


persons so important as (¢.g.) Apollos or ‘to prepare” as at Wisd. xiv. 1, 2 Macc. 
Silas; and, again, that, as he was appar- v. 1, but Mal. ii, 5 and reff. make us 
ently not a Macedonian (ix. 4), he cannot decide for the Vulgate rendering devi- 
be any of the prominent members of the tantes; the metaphor is a naval one, of 


Macedonian Church (see on ver. 5 above). shifting sail so as to avoid an enemy’s 
Trophimus the Ephesian is notimpossible pursuit), that any man should blame usin 
(see Acts xx. 4, xxi. 29), but it is idleto the matter of thts bounty (see xii. 18; 


speculate where the evidence is so scanty. ἅδρός = full, ripe, rich, as at x Kings i. 
The important point about this unnamed 9, Job xxxiv. 19, Isa. xxxiv. 7, Jer. v. 5, 


brother is that he was selected not by and so ἀδρότης stands for a considerable 
St. Paul, but by the Churches w and liberal—a “ fat’? — contribution) 

1 which ἐς being administered by us. For 
their representative as is now explained. the broken constr. στελλόμενοι x.T-X. cf. 


Ver. 19. οὐ μόνον δὲ ἀλλὰ «.7.A.: and ν. 12, vii. 5. 
not only so, but who was also appointed Ver. 21. προνοοῦμεν yap κιτ.λ.: for 
(χειροτονεῖν is, strictly, to vote bya show “τοῦ provide things honest” not only “in 
of hands, and hence it came to mean δ Lor ut also “in the 





‘to elect”) by the Churches, i.e., all the sight of men,” an injunction in the Pro- 
local congregations interested, as our verbs which the Apostle quotes again at 
fellow traveller in the matter of this Rom.xii.17. Where other people’s money 
grace (reading ἐν; see crit. note), sc., is in question, One cannot be too careful ; 
this contribution of money (see vv. 6, 7, and the prudence of the method pursued 
1 Cor. xvi. 3), which is being ministered in this collection, whereby the contribut- 
by us to exhibit the glor ing Chur Ὄ 
cf. iv. 15), and our readiness. The MS. accompany St. Paul and to check jhis 
evidence requires us to read ἡμῶν, but accounts, is worthy of close imitation in 
it must be confessed that ὑμῶν is rather the ecclesiastical finance of a later age 
what we should expect, especially as (cf. vi. 3). 
προθυμία in ver. 11 andin ix.2is applied Ver. 22. συνεπέμψαμεν δὲ αὐτοῖς 
to the Corinthians and not to St. Paul; κτλ: and we have sent with them our 
a plausible conjecture would be xara brother, whom we have many times proved 
προθυμίαν ἡμῶν for καὶ προθ. ἧμ., but earnest in many things, but now much 
the words give an intelligible sense as more earnest because of the great confidence 
they stand (see Gal. ii. 10). which he has in you (cf. Gal. v. το, 
Ver. 20. στελλόμενοι τοῦτο K.T-A.: πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς), t.¢., which was in- 
avoiding this (στελλέσθαι might mean _ spired by the account that Titus brought 








go ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


f Reff. i. 15. πολὺ σπουδαιότερον * πεποιθήσει πολλῇ τῇ εἰς ὑμᾶς. 
ὑπὲρ Τίτου, " κοινωνὸς ἐμὸς καὶ εἰς ὑμᾶς συνεργός " " εἴτε ἀδελφοὶ 


g τ Cor. 


xv. I 


VIII. 23—24. 


23. ® εἴτε 


h Lk. v. 10; ἡμῶν, ἀπόστολοι ἐκκλησιῶν, δόξα Χριστοῦ.Σ 24. Τὴν οὖν * ἔνδειξιν 


Philm. 


17; Isa.i τῆς ἀγάπης ὑμῶν, καὶ ἡμῶν " καυχήσεως ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, εἰς αὐτοὺς 
23; cf. 


reff. i. 7. i Rom. iii. 25, 26; Phil. i. 28 only. 


k Reff. i. 12. 


1 DE, d, e, the Peshitto and Bohairic give ovvepyos εἰς vpas. 


2 CF have Κυριου for Χριστου. 


of their good conduct. It is as impossible 
to identify this ‘‘ brother” as him of ver. 
18; like the first named he was an envoy 
of the contributing Churches (ver. 23), 
and further (what is not said of the first 
named) he was on terms of personal inti- 
macy with St. Paul, as appears from this 
verse. The guess that he was Tychicus 
is a plausible one (see Acts xx. 4, Eph. 
vi. 21, Col. iv. 7, 2 Tim. iv. 12, Tit. iii. 
12), but it is only a guess and is incapable 
of verification. A few cursives (see on 
xiii. 13) give the name of Barnabas with 
those of Titus and Luke in the subscrip- 
tion at the end of the Epistle, and this 
may represent an early tradition. 

Ver. 23. εἴτε ὑπὲρ Τίτου x.T.A.: 
whether you ask about Titus (cf. on i. 
8 for this use of ὑπέρ), he is my colleague 
and my fellow worker to you ward (for 
him St. Paul will be personally respon- 
sible), or our brethren, they are the 
envoys of Churches, i.e., they were duly 
χειροτονηθέντες (ver. 19). The term 
ἀπόστολος is generally used by St. Paul 
as a technical term; but occasionally, as 
here, and at Phil. ii. 25 (of Epaphroditus) 
and (possibly) at Rom. xvi. 7, he uses 
it in its primitive etymological meaning 
of ‘‘envoy” or ‘‘emissary ” (cf. 1 Kings 
xiv. 6). These men are further described 
as δόξα Χριστοῦ, the glory of Christ, per- 
haps because their work is so specially 
ad majorem Dei gloriam (see ver. 19 and 
ix. 13). 

Ver. 24. τὴν οὖν ἔνδειξιν x.7.A.: shew 
ye therefore (if we read ἐνδεικνύμενοι the 
exhortation is indirect, as at Rom. xii. 
21) unto them in the face of the Churches 
the demonstration of your love, sc., to us 
(cf. ver. 7), and of our glorying on your 
behalf, sc., my boasting of your readiness 
to give (cf. vil. 4, 14, and ix. 2, 3). 

HAPTER IX.—Vv. 1-5. HE Is οον- 
FIDENT OF THEIR READINESS TO GIVE; 
BUT TITUS AND HIS COMPANIONS HAVE 
BEEN SENT ON, THAT THE COLLECTION 
MAY BE READY WHEN HE ARRIVES AT 
CorintTH.—Ver. 1. περὶ μὲν yap K.t.A. : 
for concerning the ministration to the 


3 D*G, g give υπερ npev. 


saints, i.e., the collection (see on viii. 4), 
itis superfluous (cf. 2 Macc. xii. 44) for 
me to write, sc., this letter (note the force 
of the art. before γράφειν), to you, who 
‘were the first to make a beginning” 
(viii. 10). Cf. x Thess. iv. 9. 

Ver. 2. οἶδα yap τὴν προθ. x.T.A.: 
for I know your readiness, of which I 
glory (for constr. cf. xi. 30, Prov. xxvii. 1) 
on your behalf (cf. vii..14) to the Mace- 
donians, that Achaia (not ὑμεῖς, he re- 
ports the actual words in which he made 
his boast; for ‘‘*Achaia” see on i. 1) 
has been prepared since last year (see on 
viii. 10 above), i.e., to make its contribu- 
tion. It would seem that the Apostle 
feared that he had somewhat overstated 
the case, as he is evidently anxious about 
the Corinthian collection. The use of 
the present tense, καυχῶμαι Μακεδόσιν, 
shows that he is writing from Macedonia 
(see Introd., p. 12).---καὶ τὸ ὑμῶν ζῆλος 
K.T.A.: and your zeal (see on vii. 7) has 
provoked the majority of them (see on ii. 
6), sc., to contribute (cf. viii. 10). 

Ver. 3. ἔπεμψα δὲ τοὺς 48. κιτιλ. 
but (the δέ corresponding to μέν of ver. 
1) I have sent (the epistolary aorist; cf. 
viii. 18) the brethren (cf. viii. 16-22), that 
our glorying on your behalf may not be 
made void (cf. esp. 1 Cor. ix. 15) in this 
respect, 1,6., in the matter of actually 
gathering the money, as distinct from 
their general readiness to be liberal (viii. 
10), in order that, even as I said, sc., to 
the Macedonians to whom he had re- 
peatedly boasted of Corinthian generosity 
(ver. 2), ye may be prepared. 

Ver. 4. μή πὼς ἐὰν ἔλθωσι κ.Ῥτ.λ.: 
lest by any means, if there come with me 
any of Macedonia (not “ they of Mace- 
donia,”’ as A.V.; it is probably a fair 
inference from this verse that the un- 
named ‘ brethren ” of viii. 18, 22 were not 
Macedonians), and find you unprepared, 
z.e., with the collection still incomplete, 
we—that we say not, ye (which is what 
he really wishes to convey to them)— 
should be put to shame in this confidence, 
i.e., should be shamed because of our 


a .“ 
τ a 











ΙΧ. I-—§, 


‘ ἐνδείξασθε,1 καὶ 3 εἰς "πρόσωπον τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν. 
γὰρ τῆς διακονίας τῆς εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους περισσόν μοι ἐστὶ τὸ ὃ γράφειν 
ὑμῖν. 2. οἶδα γὰρ τὴν " προθυμίαν ὑμῶν, ἣν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν καυχῶμαι ἃ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 91 


; ‘ 1 Rom. ii 
IX. 1. Περὶ μὲν i, ay 
ἢ, ii. 7. 
τὴ Reff. i. 11. 
Reff. viii. 
I 


I. 
Μακεδόσιν, ὅτι ᾿Αχαΐα παρεσκεύασται " ἀπὸ " πέρυσι καὶ 64 é§%b Chap. viii. 


ὑμῶν " ζῆλος “ ἠρέθισε " τοὺς " πλείονας. 3. ἔπεμψα ὅ δὲ τοὺς ἀδελ- ς Re 


10 only. 
ff, vii. 7. 
ol, iii. 


Us, ἵνα τὸ καύχημα ἡμῶν 73° ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν © κενωθῇ, ἢ ἐν τῷ 21 only; 
φοὺς, ἵνα μ χημα ἣμ ρ op f 1 a 
ἢ μέρει " τούτῳ - ἵνα, καθὼς ἔλεγον, παρεσκευασμένοι ἦτε" 4. μή" xix. 7. 


e Ref. ii. 6. 


πως 10 ἐὰν 11 ἔλθωσι σὺν ἐμοὶ Μακεδόνες καὶ εὕρωσιν ὑμᾶς ' ἀπαρα- f Refi. i. 14. 


Rom. iv. 


a ° a ® & 
σκευάστους, ἢ" καταισχυνθῶμεν ἡμεῖς, ἵνα μὴ λέγωμεν 13 bpets,!® ἐν τῇ Με Cor. 
‘§mootdce: ταύτῃ THS!* καυχήσεως. 5. ™dvayKatov οὖν "ἡγησάμην 15; Phil. 


ii. 7 only. 


παρακαλέσαι τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς, ἵνα “ προέλθωσιν eis” ὑμᾶς, Kal ° προ- Β Refi. iii. 


καταρτίσωσι τὴν προκατηγγελμένην" εὐλογίαν ὑμῶν!" 7 ταύτην ᾿Ῥἑτοίμην i 


14. 1 Chap. xi. yf Heb. iii. 14. 
Acts xx. 5,13. 0 Here only. 


m Phil. ii. 5; 2 Macc, ix. a1. 
p Chap. x. 6,16; Tit. i 


10. 
Here only. 
Reff. vii. 
M n Here only in Paul; οἱ. 
. iii, 1. 


1 s9CDbcE**KLP, f, vg. the Syriac and Bohairic support ἐνδειξασθε; BD*E*G 
17, ἃ, e, g give evSecxvupevor (preferred by Tisch.). 


2 και before εἰς προσ. is found in a few cursives only, and should be omitted. 


5 C 17 om. ro before ypadeww ; G has του. 
4 Better ro . . - {yAos with WB 17 (see on viii. 2). 
5 Better om. εξ before vpwv with BCP 17, f, vg. the Peshitto and Bohairic. 


6 DE and the Bohairic give ewepapev. 


8 6, g OM. To ὑπερ υμων. 
10 BDb and the Peshitto om. eav. 


7 B* has καυχημα υμων. 
9 Ὁ", d, e, f, g, vg. om. πως. 


11 PD*bE*L, d, e and the Peshitto have και καταισχ. 


1 C*DEG, d, e, g give λεγω. 


18. B* has Aey. ἡμεις. 


Mens καυχησεως is found in ScDcEKLP and the Syriac vss. (from xi. 17); better 
om, τῆς Kavynoews S*BCD*G 17, vg. and the Bohairic. 


15 $SCKL support εἰς vpas; BDEG have προς. 
16 KL support προκατηγγελμενὴν ; better προεπηγγελμένην (Rom. i. 2 only) with 


NSBCDEGP. 
1 Ὁ", d, 6, m, vg. om. υμων. 


exaggerated statements. ὑπόστασις = 
substratum or substance (Heb. i. 3, xi. 1) 
is sometimes used in the LXX as = 
*“sround of hope” (Ruth i. 12, Ps. 
xxxvili, 6, Ezek. xix. 5), and thus it 
came to mean “ confidence,” as here (see 
reff.). 

Ver, 5. ἀναγκαῖον οὖν ἡγησάμην 
K.t-A.: therefore, sc., because of the 
reason in ver. 4, I thought it necessary to 
exhort the brethren (inasmuch as two of 
these “brethren ’’ were not chosen by 
St. Paul, but were the delegates of the 
contributing Churches, the rendering 
“‘entreat” of the ΚΕΝ. conveys well the 
meaning of παρακαλέσαι; but see on 
viii. 6) that they should go beforehand 
unto you, sc., before the Apostle should 


himself arrive at Corinth, and make up 
beforehand your bounty which was pro- 
mised beforehand, sc., to the Macedonians. 
“‘ Bis dat qui cito dat” is what he would 
impress upon the Corinthian Christians. 
εὐλογία, elsewhere used in the N.T. as 
= “blessing” (e.g., Rom. xv. 29, 1 Cor. 
x. 16, Gal. iii. 14), is here = “ gift,” a 
meaning which as the rendering of 


rt lab it frequently has in the LXX 


(Gen. xxxiii. 11, etc.). ‘‘ Originally the) 
blending of the two ideas arose from the 
fact that every blessing or praise of God 
or man was in the East (as still to a great 
extent) accompanied by a gift ’ (Stanley). 
Cf. the similar ambiguity in the word 
χάρις.---ταύτην ἑτοίμην elvarK.t.A.* that 


92 τ ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B ΙΧ, 


ΣΝ ἡ 29; εἶναι, οὕτως ὡς εὐλογίαν, καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ 3 “ πλεονεξίαν. 6. τοῦτο 

ΠΣ ΡῈ δὲ,3 ὁ ᾿ σπείρων "φειδομένως φειδομένως καὶ "θερίσει καὶ ὁ σπείρων 
z These. ἐπ᾽ * εὐλογίαις ἐπ᾽ “ εὐλογίαις καὶ δ θερίσει. 7. ἕκαστος καθὼς 
τα Cor. Ix *rpoatpeirat® τῇ καρδίᾳ: ph ἐκ λύπης ἢ “ἐξ " ἀνάγκης " “ἱλαρὸν 
sdanee onty, yap " Sérnv ἀγαπᾷ ὁ "Θεός. 8. Buvatds’ δὲ ὃ ὁ Θεὸς πᾶσαν χάριν 
OAS περισσεῦσαι εἰς ὑμᾶς, ἵνα “dy “ παντὶ πάντοτε πᾶσαν * αὐτάρκειαν 


re only. 
u Heb. vil μι, v Prov. xxii.8. wReff.iv.8 x21 Tim. vi. 6 only; οἵ. Phil. iv. 11. 


1 £9*G, d, e, f, g, πὶ, vg. and Peshitto om. και after evAoy.; ins. §cBCDEKLP, 
the Harclean and Bohairic. 

2 ws is the true reading; ὡσπερ is found in a few cursives only. 

8 f, τῇ, vg. and the Bohairic supply Aeyw after Se. 


4 D*G, d, e, g, πὶ and the Bohairic give ev ευλογίᾳ for the first em. evd., and for 
the second D*, d, e have εξ evAoy.as, and G has en’ ευλογιᾳ.- 


5 D*E om. και. 


®DEKL support προαιρειται; G 17 have προειρηται; better προῃρηται with 
NWBCP. 


7 C2DbcEKLP support δυνατος ; better δυνατει with ΒΟ Πα". ᾿ 
8 Ὁ" and the Peshitto give yap for Se. 








(we must supply ὥστε as at Col. iv. 6) according as he hath purposed (note the 
4 same might be re perf.; he implies that they had already it 
οὕτως ws marks t i ich made up their minds to give. προαίρεσις * 
the thank-offering is desired ; is Aristotle’s formal word in Nic. Eth., iii. 2 
lil. 15, iv. I, 1x. 26), and not as an extor- 3.19, for a free act of moral choice) in his g 
tion, sc., a matter of covetous grasping on heart (cf. Exod. xxv. 2, “οὗ every man Ly 
ay Pat SLT) The AV rendering” whose heart maketh him willing, ye shall ᾿ 
of πλεονεξίαν = “ covetousness,” seems take my offering”); not grudgingly or of , 
to mean “ niggardliness, such as acovet- necessity, i” “God loveth a cheerful 
ous man would exhibit,” and this would giver”. In this quotation from Prov. 
fall in well with the verses which follow; xxii. 8, St. Paul substitutes (perhaps to 
but it is not agreeable to the general avoid the cognate of εὐλογία) ἀγαπᾷ for 
meaning of the word or to St. Paul’s εὐλογεῖ, the LXX reading as it has come 
usage elsewhere (see reff.). down to us, but the sense is not altered. 
Vv. 6-11. LIBERAL GIVING IS BLESSED The duty of almsgiving played a large | 
ΟΕ Gop.—Ver. 6. τοῦτο δὲ, ὁ σπείρων part in Hebrew ethics, and that it should ἡ 
κιτιλ.: but (sc., although I am not press- be carried out ungrudgingly is often in- _ 
ing you to give, cf. ver. 1) this I say ~aevet_orin- the ὍΤ᾽ and Apocrypha, a” 
(understanding φημι; cf. 1 Cor. vii. 29, point specially to be emphasised in the 
xv. 50), He that soweth sparingly shall case of a people who have always had 
reap also sparingly, and he that soweth the repute of being over-fond of money— | 
bountifully (lit., ‘‘on the principle of e., “ Thine heart shall not be grieved : 
bounties”; cf. x Cor. ix. 10, ἐπ᾿ ἐλπίδι, when thou givest unto him” (Deut. xv. 
for a similar dative of condition) shall 10); ‘Let not thine eye be envious’ 
also reap bountifully. Asimilar principle (Tobit iv. 7); “In every gift show a 
of spiritual husbandry is laid down in cheerful countenance” (Ecclus. xxxv. 9). 
Prov. xi. 24, 25, where its application is These precepts St. Paul commends to the 
plainly to the temporal prosperity of the Corinthians (cf. Rom. xii. 8). (Note that 
‘liberal soul”; cf. also Luke vi. 38. the practice of having “all things com- 
Here, too, this is, no doubt, the main mon,’ which was initiated by the enthu- 
thought (cf. viii. 14); but St, Paul else- siasm of the first converts (Acts iv. 32 ff.), 
where extends the principle to the future did not last long; it was a noble attempt 
harvest which each soul shall reapaccord- to express in outward deed the brother- 
ing to its sowing (Gal. vi--77 δῦ. chap. v. hood of men as revealed in the Incarna- 
. tion, but was, in fact, impracticable). 
Ver. 7. ἕκαστος καθὼς κ.τιλ.: Let Ver. 8. δυνατεῖ δὲ ὁ Θεὸς «.7.A.: and 
each man give (understanding διδότω) God is powerful (see reff. xiii. 3) to make 





s 














6—12, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


93 


ἔχοντες, περισσεύητε ἢ εἰς " πᾶν " ἔργον "ἀγαθόν: 9. καθὼς yéypam-¥ 2 ἴω ii, 
tat, *“*’Eoxdpmoev, ἔδωκε τοῖς πένησιν - ἡ δικαιοσύνη αὐτοῦ μένει 2 Ps. cxi.9. 


εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα 1", το. ὁ δὲ " ἐπιχορηγῶν " σπέρμα 23 τῷ σπείροντι agi 
καὶ ἄρτον εἰς βρῶσιν “ χορηγήσαι," καὶ “ πληθύναι ὃ τὸν “ σπόρον 
ὑμῶν, καὶ αὐξησαι 8 τὰ " γεννήματα ὁ τῆς " δικαιοσύνης ὑμῶν" 
*év5 ἐ παντὶ © πλουτιζόμενοι εἰς πᾶσαν " ἁπλότητα, ἥτις ° ' κατεργά- 


a Gal. iii. 5; 


i, 
19. 

b Isa. lv. 10, 

II. ci Pet. iv. 

11 only; 

Ecclus. 

XXXIX. 33. 


ἵεται δι᾿ ἡμῶν 7 "εὐχαριστίαν τῷ ὅ Θεῷ 12. ὅτι ἡ διακονία τῆς ἃ Here only 


in Paul. 


ἰλειτουργίας ταύτης οὐ μόνον ἐστὶ ™ προσαναπληροῦσα τὰ " ὑστερή- ς Hos. x. τ, 


eff. iv. 8, 


ματα τῶν °dyiwy, ἀλλὰ Kal περισσεύουσα διὰ πολλῶν εὐχαριστιῶν ¢ Keii.vi.so. 


i Reff. iv. 17. 


2. k Reff. iv. 15. 
o Reff. i. x. 


1 GK, f, g add του atwvos at end. 


1 Phil. ii. 17, 30. 


Reff. viii. 


m Chap. xigonly. oo Reiff. viii. 13. 


3 SSCDbcEKLP support σπερμα; BD*G have σπορον.- 


8 ScDcGKL support the aorist infinitives 
πληθυνει .. » αυξησει with *BCD*P, the 


4 The uncials have γενηματα. 
® D* has εἰ τις for ἡτις. 










a l Ἴ 

ly goods and gifts 
may abound 
ork. Note the parono- 
ν παντὶ, πάντοτε, πᾶσαν « « « 


masia, 
περισσεύητε « » - πᾶν. 

ὗν. 9 and tro are parenthetical, con- 
taining an illustrative quotation and its 
application.—Ver. 9. 
“᾿Ἐσκόρπισεν K.T.A. ; 


sc., in the words of Scripture (perhaps ?thvough us (he goes On in the next verse 
“to explain how this ts) thank 


the quotation was suggested by the 


(or optatives) ; better xopnyynoas « « - 
atins aud the Bohairic. 


5 G, g read wa ev παντι.- 
7 C*P, g* and the Harclean margin give δι᾽ vpwv. 
5. Ὁ" om. tw; B has evxap. Θεου. 


τῆς ἀμπέλου, “the fruit of the vine” in 
the Gospels (¢e.g., Mark xiv. 25). This 
verse is the application, as it were, of the 
quotation in ver. 9, the connecting link 
being the word δικαιοσύνη. 

Ver. 11. He now resumes the general 
subject of ver. 8, ἐν παντὶ πλουτιζόμενοι 
here being in apposition with ἐν παντὶ 
ἔχοντες there; there is thus no 
necessity to treat πλουτιΐζ. as a nom. 
pendens,—dv παντὶ πλοντιζόμενοι κ.τ.λ.: 


καϑὼς γέγραπται γέ being enriched in everything unto αἰΐ, 
as it is written, 1.¢., all kinds Of, liberality, which worketh 








anksgiving unto 





image of sowing and reaping which re- “God; cf. 1. rf, iv. 15. 


called the word ἐσκόρπισεν), “‘ He, sc., the 
liberal man, hath scattered abroad (cf. 
Prov. xi. 24), he hath given to the poor, 
his righteousness, i.¢., his beneficence (as 
at Matt. vi. 1; St. Paul, when using his 
own words, never uses δικαιοσύνη in this 
old Hebrew sense), endureth for ever.” 
Ver. 10. ὁ δὲ ἐπιχορηγῶν “ oméppa 
@ σπείροντι K.7.A.: and he that sup- 
plieth “seed to the sower and bread for 
food,” shall supply and multiply your 
seed, i.e., your means of giving, for sow- 
ing (the A.V. not only follows the inferior 
reading, but conceals the quotation from 
Isa, lv. 10), and increase (cf. 1 Cor. iii. 6 
for the trans, use of αὐξάνω) the “ fruits” 
of your “righteousness,” i.¢., Of your 
beneficence, as in the preceding verse. 
The phrase γενήματα δικαιοσύνης in ref. 
Hosea may be illustrated by τὸ γένημα 


y ankagivings unto God 
er. 13. διὰ τῆς δοκιμῆς τῆς διακ. 


κιτιλ. : 






Vv. 12-15. LIBERAL GIVING WILL 
CALL FORTH THE BLESSINGS OF THE 
RECIPIENTS.—Ver. 12. 





(cf. iv. ΤΠ). 


inasmuch as they, i.e., the Judzan 
gen. after δοκιμή), glorify 


God (cf. Matt. v. 16, τ Pet. ii. 12) for the 
obedience of your confession in regard to 









94 


p Reff. ii. 9. 
q Gal. ii. 5; 
1 Tim. ti. 


11, iii. 4. 


ΠΡΟΣ KO#INOIOYS B 


IX. 13—15. 


τῷ Θεῷ 13. διὰ 2 τῆς ' δοκιμῆς τῆς διακονίας ταύτης δοξάζοντες 
τὸν Θεὸν ἐπὶ τῇ “ ὑποταγῇ τῆς "ὁμολογίας ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον 


ri Tim, vi. τοῦ Χριστοῦ, καὶ "ἁπλότητι τῆς "κοινωνίας εἰς αὐτοὺς Kal εἰς πάντας, 


12; Heb. 


iii. 1,iv. 14, καὶ αὐτῶν δεήσει ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν, " ἐπιποθούντων ὑμᾶς διὰ τὴν " ὕπερ- 


15. ᾿ χάρις δὲ ὁ “ τῷ “ Θεῷ 


14, X. 23 αἱ da pea ea 
sal oe βάλλουσαν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐφ᾽ ὑμῖν. 

5 Refi. viii. ie Βὲ Ἴ 
a πὶ τῇ * ἀνεκδιηγήτῳ αὐτοῦ ” δωρεᾷ. 

t . Vi. 14. 

u Ref, v. . v Ref. iii. ro. w Reff. ii. 14. x Here only. 


1 B has Χριστῳ for Geg. 


2B has και Sa. 


y Rom. v. 15, 17; Eph. iii. 7, iv. 9, 


3 BE have ὑπερ μων. 


4SecC*DbcEKLP, the Syriac and Bohairic vss. give δὲ after χαρις; om. 


NQ*BC*D*G 17 and the Latins. 


the Gospel of Christ (cf. ii. 12). The 
sentence is an anacoluthon ; δοξάζοντες 
cannot be taken as in apposition with 
πλουτιζόμενοι of ver. 11, for the persons 
referred to are different. It would be 
grammatically admissible to take Sogdf. 
τὸν Θεὸν with εἰς τὸ εὐαγγ. τοῦ Xp., but 
the order of words and the sense both 
support the connexion ὁμολογίας els 
x.t.A. Of the A.V. “ by the experiment of 
this ministration they glorify God for your 
professed subjection unto the Gospel of 
Christ’ Lightfoot truly remarks that “‘a 
concurrence of Latinisms obscures the 
sense and mars the English”. The con- 
tribution of money for the relief of the 
Christian poor is a ὁμολογία, inasmuch 
as it is the manifestation to the world of 
belief in Christ’s Gospel; ὁμολογία is a 
““ confession.” “ vow,” i 
eut. xii. 17, Amos iv. 5) = “‘a free will 
offering ".---καὶ ἁπλότητι τῆς κοινωνίας 
«.t.A.: and for the liberality of your con- 
tribution unto them and unto all. This 
would suggest that the rich Corinthian 
Church had been liberal to other Churches 
besides that of Jerusalem, but we have 
no knowledge of anything of the sort. 
Ver. 14. καὶ αὐτῶν δεήσει x.7.X. 
This is again an independent sentence, 
beginning with a gen. abs.: while they 
also, with supplication on your behalf, 
long after you (sc., apparently, long to 
see you) by reason of the exceeding grace 





prayers of those whom you are helping, 





Apostle bursts_out here into ἃ charactes- 

istic doxology i i i i 
self (John iti. 16) and of salvation in Him, 

—ranktur appreciation of which bad-boene 
such fruit in Christian lives. 

ΠῚ. The Vindication of his Apos- 
tolic Authority. It would appear that 
while Titus had brought favourable news 
as to the loyalty with which the Cor- 
inthians had received St. Paul’s message 
of reproof in the matter of the incestuous 
person (vii. 9-11), he had also brought 
distressing intelligence as to the deprecia- 
tion of the Apostle’s authority by certain 
active Judaisers at Corinth. The case is 
80 serious that it requires immediate 
attention, and the third (and last) section 
of the latter is occupied with St. Paul’s 
reply in vindication of his claims. See 
Introd., p. 22. 

CHAPTER X.—Vv. 1-6. HE BEGs 
THEM NOT TO FORCE HIM TO EXERT HIS 
AUTHORITY WITH SEVERITY WHEN HE 
COMES. He first expresses the hope that 
their conduct will be such as to admit of 
his being ‘“‘meek and gentle” when he 
arrives at Corinth, of his coming in a 
‘“‘ spirit of meekness,” and not “with a 
rod” (x Cor. iv. 21).—Ver. 1. αὐτὸς δὲ 
ἐγὼ Παῦλος «.7.A.: now (δέ marks a 
transition to a new subject, as at viii. 1, 
1 Cor, xv. 1) I Paul myself (αὐτὸς ἐγὼ, 
calling attention to a specially personal 
matter as at xii. 13, Rom. ix. 3, xv. 14; 
he writes ἐγὼ Παῦλος elsewhere at Gal. v. 
2, Eph. iii. 1, Philm. 19 only, for the sake 








~who feel the yearnings of affection for of emphasis) entreat you (cf. i. 4, and for 
their benefactors in wee the working the constr. παρακαλῶ διὰ cf. Rom. xii. 1, 
of God’s grace has n_so signally dis- 


ae. 

er. 15. yapls τῷ Θεῷ x.1.d.: thanks 
be to God for His ota frp gift. 
δωρεά is always in the N.T. (see reff., 
etc.) used of the gifts of God, not of 
men; and the “unspeakable” gift (cf. 
Rom. xi, 33, Eph. iii. 20) for which the 


xv. 30, 1 Cor. i. 10; the πραὕτης καὶ 
ἐπιείκεια τοῦ Xp. are the example which 

ives point to the entreaty or exhortation) 
By the meekness and gentleness of the 
Christ. That the Messianic King should 
be πραῦς had been declared by Zechariah 
(ix. 9, cited Matt. xxi. 5), while πραύτης 
had been associated with His royal pro- 














X. I—5. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


95 


X. 1. AYTOE δὲ ἐγὼ Παῦλος παρακαλῶ ὑμᾶς διὰ τῆς "πραότητος 1 1 Cor: iv. 


καὶ " ἐπιεικείας τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὃς " κατὰ " πρόσωπον μὲν * ταπεινὸς ἐν 


a1; Gal. 
Vv. 23; 
Eph. iv. 


_ 


ὑμῖν, ἀπὼν δὲ "θαῤῥῶ eis? ὑμᾶς 2. *Sdouar δὲ, τὸ μὴ παρὼν θαρρῆσαι 2; Col. 


~ 


τῇ 


ἡμᾶς ὡς ‘kata ' σάρκα |‘ περιπατοῦντας. 
πατοῦντες, οὐ κατὰ σάρκα ᾿ στρατευόμεθα- 4. (τὰ γὰρ ὅπλα τῆς 
Ὁ στρατείας ἡμῶν οὐ σαρκικὰ, ἀλλὰ δυνατὰ τῷ Θεῷ πρὸς "καθαίρεσιν 
“ὀχυρωμάτων ") 5. Ῥλογισμοὺς καθαιροῦντες καὶ πᾶν ὕψωμα "ἐπαιρό- 


μενον κατὰ τῆς γνώσεως τοῦ Θεοῦ, 


πεποιθήσει ὃ ἡ λογίζομαι "τολμῆσαι ἐπί τινας τοὺς λογιζομένους > om a 


iil. 12. 


κὰν Κα ὶ - ¢f. Phil. 
3. “ἐν “ σαρκὶ yap περι Met ap 
Tim. iii. 
3; Jas. iii. 
17. 
ς Acts iii. 
13, xxv. 16. 
d Reff. vii. 6. 


καὶ ὁ "αἰχμαλωτίζοντες πᾶν 'νόημα e Ref. v. 6. 


ε f Reff. v. 20. 

g Reif. i. 15. h 1 Cor. vi. 1; chap. xi. 21, etc. i Rom. viii. 4; cf. reff. i. 17. k Gal. ii. 20; 
Phil. i. 22; Col. ii. 1, etc. 11 Cor. ix. 7; 1 Tim. i. 18; 2 Tim. ii. 4. m 1 Tim. i. 18 only. 

n Ver. 8, chap. xiii. 10 only. © Here only. P Rom, ii. 15 only; Prov. vi. 18. q Rom. viii. 


9 only. r Chap. xi. 20; Ezra iv. 19. 


t Reff, ii. 11. 


s Lk. xxi. 24; Rom. vii. 23; 2 Tim. iii. 6 only. 


1 The better spelling is πραυτητος with S*BGP 17. 
2 P and the Latins give ev ὑμῖν for εἰς vpas. 
5 C* and the Bohairic add ταυτῃ (cf. i. 15) after ry wen. 


4 6, d, ¢, g, m om. και, 


ess by the Psalmist (Ps. xliv. 5); and 
hrist, when He came, declared that he 
was πραῦς καὶ ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ, a 
claim which His life on earth abundantly 
exemplified (cf. Matt. xii. 19, Luke xxiii. 
34). So too in the wonderful portrait of 
the Righteous Man in Wisd. ii. 12 ff., 
ἐπιείκεια, “ gentleness,” ‘‘ sweet reason- 
ableness,” is one of the qualities men- 
tioned (ver. 19). In Greek Ethics (e.g., 
Aristotle, Nic. Eth., v., 10) the ἐπιεικής is 
the “‘ equitable” man, who does not press 
for the last farthing of his rights (see 
reff.). St. Paul alludes to these qualities 
as well known to have belonged to the 
character of Jesus, even as they had been 
foretold of the Messiah.—8s κατὰ πρό- 
owrov «.t.X.: I Paul, who indeed (sc., as 
you say by way of reproach, the conces- 
sive μέν) before your vice am lowly among 
you he had admitted this before, 1 Cor. 
li. 3 and chap. vii. 6, and the lowliness of 
his demeanour had been made the subject 
of adverse comment, see further ver. 10), 
but being absent am of good courage to- 
wards you, t.¢.,am outspoken in rebuke 
of you (a quite different phrase from 
θαρρῶ ἐν ὑμῖν of vii. 16). 
er. 2. δέομαι δὲ τὸ μὴ παρὼν x.7.A. : 
nay (sc., “Ὠοννανοσ that be,” δέ recom- 
mencing the sentence) I beseech you, that 
I may not (the use of the article with py 
and the inf. is somewhat unusual; but 
cf. ii. 1, Rom. xiv. 13; τὸ adds emphasis 
to the thing asked), when present, shew 
courage with the confidence (almost = 
“‘peremptoriness "’) wherewith I count on 


myself (mid., not passive) to be bold 

ainst some (for the vague τινες see on 
iil, 1) which count νὰ us as if we walked 
according to the flesh. His opponents 
charged him with low motives Cf. ii. 17) 
which he will indignantly and sternly 
repudiate. 

Ver. 3. ἐν σαρκὶ yap κιτιλ.: for 
though we walk in the flesh, sc., as all 
men must do (see reff.), we do not war, 
i.¢., Carry On our campaign against evil 
and the enemies of God, according to the 
flesh (cf. John xvii. 15)—for the weapons 
of our warfare (see on vi. 7) are not 
carnal (see on i. 12), but are mighty 
before God, i.e., in God’s sight, in His esti- 
mation (or, perhaps, “‘ exceeding mighty,” 
which is the force of τῷ Θεῷ at Jonah 
iii. 3, Acts vii. 20; the A.V. ‘‘ mighty 
through God,” i.¢., “‘ by His aid,” cannot 
be right), to the casting down of strong- 
holds, which is the ultimate object of every 
campaign, and which, being achieved, is 
the seal of victory ; καθαίρειν τὰ ὀχυρώ- 
ματα is the regular LXX phrase for the 
reduction of a fortress (see Prov. xxi. 22, 
Lam. ii. 2, 1 Macc. v. 65, viii. 10). 

Ver. 4 is an explanatory parenthesis, 
and the constr. of ver. 5 is continuous 
with ver. 3, the metaphor of the destruc- 
tion of the citadel being carried on. 

Ver. 5. λογισμοὺς καθαιροῦντες κ-.τ.λ.: 
casting down, as if they were centres of 
the enemy’s force, reasonings (St. Paul’s 
message, as he told the Corinthians at 1 
Cor. il. 4 was not ἐν πειθοῖς σοφίας 
λόγοις, but “in demonstration of the 


96 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B 


Χ, 


u Reff. ix. 5. eig τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ Xptotod,! 6. καὶ ἐν 2 " ἑτοίμῳ ἔχοντες ἣ ἐκδικῆσαι 


v Rom, xii. 
19, οἵ. 
vii. 11. 

w Rom. v. 
19; Heb. 
ii. 2 only. 

x Reff. ver. 
I. 


πᾶσαν “ παρακοὴν, ὅταν πληρωθῇ ὃ ὑμῶν * ἡ ὑπακοή. 
7. τὰ "κατὰ "πρόσωπον βλέπετε; εἴ τις πέποιθεν" ἑαυτῷ Χριστοῦ 
εἶναι, τοῦτο λογιζέσθω πάλιν ἀφ᾽ 7 ἑαυτοῦ, ὅτι καθὼς αὐτὸς Χριστοῦ, 


1 After Xp. D*EG, d, e, g, m add ayovres. 


2 Ὁ" has ετοιμως for ev ἐτοιμῳ. 


3 C, r add wporepov after πληρ. 


4 D*cEG, d, e, δ, r give the order ἢ vax. vpwv. 


5 B has δοκει πεποιθεναι. 


5 D*E*G, d, e, f, g supply δουλος after Xp. 


7 ad eavtov is found in CDEGKP (cf. iii. 5); better ef’ with S§BL and the 


Latins. 


Spirit and of power”; he ever regards 
the Gospel as a revelation, not a body of 
doctrine which could be reasoned out by 
man for himself from first principles— 
not, to be sure, an irrational system, but 
one which is beyond the capacity of 
reason to discover or to fathom to its 
depths), and every high thing (carrying 
on the metaphor by which the “ tower- 
ing” conceits of speculation are repre- 
sented as fortifications erected against 
the soldiers of the Cross) that is exalted, 
or “elevated,” “built up,” against the 
knowledge of God, sc., which is revealed 
in Christ, and leading captive (for aly- 
μαλωτίζειν the more correct Attic form 
is αἰχμαλωτεύειν) every thought into the 
obedience of Christ (cf. ix. 13). All 
through this passage the Apostle has 
directly in view the opposition of gain- 
sayers at Corinth, and so it is not safe to 
interpret his phrases as directed without 
qualification against the claims of the 
intellect and conscience in the matter of 
doctrine. Yet it must be remembered 
that he regarded the message which he 
preached as directly revealed to himself, 
and not derived from tradition or inter- 
pretation, and hence as possessed of a 
certainty to which the demonstrations of 
philosophy, however cogent, could not 
attain. All Truth must be loyal to “ the 
obedience of Christ,’’ who was Himself 
“the Truth ” (cf. xiii. 8). 

Ver. 6. καὶ ἐν ἑτοίμῳ ἔχοντες x.7.X.: 
and being in readiness (cf. ἑτοίμως ἔχω 
chap. xii. 14) to avenge all disobedience 
(cf. Matt. xviii. 17), sc., if there remain 
any still disobedient, when your obedi- 
ence, i.¢., to me and to my Apostolic 
authority (cf. ii. 9, vii. 15), shall be ful- 
ag The word ὑπακοή in ver. 5 brings 

im back to this, the primary object of 
his letter. He does not wish to arrive in 
Corinth until the Church as a whole is 
firm in its loyalty to him. 


Vv. 7-18. DESPITE ALL APPEARANCES, 
HIS APOSTOLICAL AUTHORITY 18 
WEIGHTY ; HIS MISSION To THE GREEKS 
Is A Divine TRust.—Ver. 7. τὰ κατὰ 
προσ. K.t-A.: ye look at the things which 
are before your face; t.e., you pay too 
much attention to outward appearances 
(cf. Rom. ii. 11, Gal. ii. 6, Eph. vi. 9), 
you lay too much stress on persona! inti- 
macy with Christ in the flesh (v. 7), and 
on a man’s bodily presence and powers of 
speech (ver. 10), even on his own self- 
commendation (ver. 12). The rec. text 

laces a note of interrogation after 
Bhérere, but it seems preferable to treat 
the sentence as a simple categorical 
statement (see esp. on ver. 12, and cf. 
John vii. 24).—et τις πέποιθεν κιτ.λ.: 
if any man (this is his usual vague way 
of referring to opponents; cf. xi. 4, 20) 
trusteth in himself that he is Christ’s, 
prides himself on specially belonging to 
what he regards as the “party” of 
Christ, which had unhappily grown up at 
Corinth (1 Cor. i, 12), let him consider this 
again (he has often heard it before, but 
has forgotten it) with himself (or, reading 
ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, “let him think this out for 
himself ”’—it does not need any prompting 
from without), that even as he is Christ’s, 
so also are we (1 Cor. iii. 23). 

Ver. 8. ἐάν τε yap καὶ περισσότερόν 
κιτιλ.: for even if I should glory some- 
what abundantly (or, perhaps, ‘‘some- 
what more abundantly,” sc., than I have 
already done in vv. 3-6; but the com- 
parative need not be pressed; cf. ii. 4), 
concerning our authority (which the Lord 
gave for building you up, and not for 
casting you down), I shall not be put to 
shame, 1.¢., my confident words can be 
amply justified. He returns here to the 
image of ver. 4; his authority (and he 
repeats this again in the same words at 
xiii. 10) extends not solely or chiefly to 
the overthrow of the fortresses of mis- 








i 
| 
| 





Se 





6—11. 


οὕτω Kal ἡμεῖς Χριστοῦ. 8. ἐάν τε 


καυχήσωμαι ὁ περὶ τῆς ἦ ἐξουσίας ἡμῶν," ἧς ἔδωκεν ὁ Κύριος ἡμῖν ὅ 


εἰς "οἰκοδομὴν καὶ οὐκ εἰς " καθαίρεσιν 


9. ἵνα μὴ δόξωϊ ὡς ἂν “ἐκφοβεῖν ὃ ὑμᾶς διὰ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν. 
ὅτι αἱ μὲν 9 ἐπιστολαὶ, prot! “ βαρεῖαι καὶ "ἰσχυραί" ἡ δὲ ᾿ παρουσία 4. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


ο7 


2 +3 y Chap. xiii, 
γὰρ καὶ ὅ περισσότερόν TY © “acd το 
ix. 4, εἰς. 

z Chaps. xii. 
10, xiii. 10; 
1 Cor. xiv, 
26, etc. 
Reff. ver. 


ὑμῶν, οὐκ ” αἰσχυνθήσομαι - 
Io. 


Ὁ Phil. i. 20. 


τοῦ σώματος ἀσθενὴς, Kai ὁ λόγος * ἐξουθενημένος - 11. τοῦτο Aoyt- ς Here only. 


ζέσθω ὁ ἢ τοιοῦτος, ὅτι οἷοί ἐσμεν τῷ ' 
τοιοῦτοι καὶ παρόντες τῷ ᾿ ἔργῳ. 


ΣΟ, X. 22. f Reff. vii. 6. 
xv. 18; Col. iii. 17. 


g Rom. xiv. 10; 1 Cor. vi. 4; Gal. iv. 14. 


A i 
λόγῳ δι᾽ ἐπιστολῶν ἀπόντες, 7; Ἶ Joka 
v. 3 


eI Cor. i 
25, 27, iv. 


h Reff. ii. 6. i Rom 


1 DcEKL and the Bohairic support Χριστου after nmes, but all the other prin- 


cipal authorities omit it. 


3 BG 17 and (perhaps) d, e, g, the Peshitto and Bohairic omit τε after εαν. 


5 ScDcE**L, the Peshitto and Harclean margin support καὶ after yap; om. και 
N*BCD*E*GP, the Latins, Bohairic and Harclean text. 


NLP 


4 BCDEK, followed by W.H., support καυχησωμαι ; Tisch. reads καυχησομαι with 


δ C*P, the Peshitto and Bohairic omit npev. 
6 yp is found in DeEGKL (P 73, f and the Harclean have ἡμῖν o κυρ.) ; om. 


ἡμῖν "ΒΟ" 17, d, e. 
7 D*EG, d, e, g give δοξωμεν. 
9 Better at ἐπιστ. μεν with $*B, τ. 


8 DE, d, e, g give εκφοβουντες. 


1 S83DEGKLP, d, e, and the Bohairic have φησιν, which is also preferred by 
W.H.; B, f, g, τ, vg. and the Syriac support φασιν. 


guided imagination, but also to the 
positive and more congenial work of 
— “.» of ‘‘ building up” (cf. Jer. 
i, το). 

Ver. 9. ἵνα μὴ δόξω x.7.A.: that I 
may not seem as if I would scare you by 
my letters. It is best to take these words 
with εἰς οἰκοδομήν of the preceding verse ; 
his purpose in writing so severely is 
not to terrify them, but to build them 
up in holiness and obedience. ὡς ἄν = 
tanquam, with the infin. is only found 
here in the N.T. The plural τῶν émo- 
τολῶν suggests (what we know from 1 
Cor. v. 9) that at least one letter of rebuke 
in addition to 1 Cor. had been written 
before this. 

Ver. 10. ὅτι αἱ ἐπιστολαὶ μὲν, φασίν 
K.t-A.: for “his letters” they say ‘are 
weighty and powerful but,” etc. The 
reading is doubtful (see crit. note) ; if we 
follow the rec. text φησίν = “‘ one says” 
or “he says” (cf. Wisd. xv. 12), the 
reference will be to an individual oppo- 
nent (the τοιοῦτος of ver. 11) who would 
be readily recognised by the Corinthians ; 
but we must then suppose tis to have 
dropped out. It is simpler therefore to 
read φασίν with the A.V. and R.V., and 


ποτ. III. 7 


to take the words as reproducing the 
charge against the Apostle commonly 
made by those who were disaffected at 
Corinth. They are ‘‘remarkable as giv- 
ing a contemporary judgment on his 
Epistles, and a personal description of 
himself” (Stanley).—# δὲ παρουσία τοῦ 
σώματος k.T.A.: “ but his bodily presence 
is weak (see chap. xii. 7, Gal. iv. 14, and 
Acts xiv. 12, where the Lystrans called 
Barnabas “ Zeus,” and evidently there- 
fore counted him as of more dignified 
presence than his companion) and his 
speech contemptible”; cf. 1 Cor. i. 17. 
Persuasive speaker as St. Paul must have 
been (the Lystrans called him Hermes 
as ‘‘ the chief speaker ”’), he probably had 
not the arts of a trained rhetorician (1 
Cor. i. 17, ii. 1, 4, chap. xi. 6), and this 
would appear a grave defect to these 
clever and shallow Greeks. According to 
the second century Acts of Paul and 
Thecla (§ 3) the Apostle was a low-sized 
man, bow-legged, of a healthy com- 
plexion, with eyebrows knit together (the 
Armenian version adds that his eyes were 
blue), and an aquiline nose. The descrip- 
tion of him in the piece called Philopatris 
(§ 13), ascribed to Lucian, is very similas, 


98 
k Reff. ver. 


mi i il. 
13 only. 
n Reff. τ “¢ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


Χ, 


᾿ 12. Οὐ γὰρ "τολμῶμεν ᾿ἐγκρῖναι3 ἢ "συγκρῖναι ἑαυτούς τισι τῶν 
1 Here only. ἑαυτοὺς " συνιστανόντων - ἀλλὰ αὐτοὶ ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἑαυτοὺς 3 ° μετροῦν- 
τες, καὶ συγκρίνοντες ἑαυτοὺς ἑαυτοῖς, οὐ "συνιοῦσιν 13. ἡμεῖς δὲ 


o Here only οὐχὶ εἰς τὰ “ἄμετρα καυχησόμεθα, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸ *péTpov τοῦ 


in Paul. 


p Rom. xy. " κανόνος οὗ 1 ἐμέρισεν i ἡμῖν 


21; Eph. ἘΝ 
ν. 17. καὶ ὑμῶν. 14. οὐ il 
1 Ver. 15 
only. a 
; og hag 7. s Vv. 15, 16; Gal. vi. 16; Phil. iii. 16 only. 
u Hers only. 
B has Tolpe. 


8 ὃ "Θεὸς 9 μέτρου, " ἐφικέσθαι 19 ἄχρι 
γὰρ ὡς μὴ ἐφικνούμενοι 12 εἰς ὑμᾶς "ὑπερεκτείνομεν 
ἑαυτούς - ἄχρι γὰρ 13 καὶ ὑμῶν " ἐφθάσαμεν ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ 


t Rom. xii. 3; 1 Cor. vii. 17. 


v Matt. xii. 28; Rom. ix. 31; Phil. iii. 16; 1 Thess. ii. 16, 


2G has xptwat; DE add eavrovs. 


8 §9* om. eavrous before perp. ; DEK 73 have eavrovs eavtots. 


4 DcEKLP support συνιουσιν ; better συνιασιν with NB 17, 37; δ" has evne- 
ασιν ; om, ov συν. ἡμεις δε D*G, d, ε, f, g (see note below). 


5 D*G and the Latins give εἰς To apetpov. 


6 G, f, g give καυχωμενοι ; om. καυχ. D*, d, ε. 


7M 67**, d, e, f, g, vg. give οσου ἐμετρησεν. 


8 GL, g, om. ἡμῖν. 


9 DE, ἃ, e give Κυριος. 


Ὁ DE have αφικεσθαι. 


11 P has ov yap py ὡς; Β has simply ws yap μὴ, which W.H. place in their 


margin. 
12 K has αφικνουμενοι ; G, αφικομενοι. 


Ver. 11. τοῦτο λογιζέσθω «.7.A.: let 
such an one, sc., as makes comments of 
the kind just quoted, reckon this, that (cf. 
constr. ver. 7) what we are in word by 
letters when we are absent, such are we 
also in deed when we are present. 

Ver. 12. οὐ yap τολμῶμεν «.T.A.: for 
we do not venture (an ironical refusal to 
put himself on a level with his adver- 
saries, whose shallow pretensions he 
thus quietly exposes) to number or com- 
pare ourselves (note the paronomasia in 
the Greek) with certain of them that 
commend themselves (the charge made 
against him—see on iii. 1—he retorts 
with great effect on his opponents) ; but 
they themselves measuring themselves by 
themselves and comparing themselves with 
themselves are without understanding (cf. 
Prov. xxvi. 12). This sentence is so 
much involved, that it is not surprising 
to find the Western authorities (see crit. 
note) giving it a quite different turn by 
the omission of the words οὐ συνιοῦσιν 
(or συνιᾶσιν) ἡμεῖς δὲ . . . καυχησόμεθα. 
Following this shorter text, the meaning 
would be: “but we are measuring our- 
selves by ourselves and comparing our- 
selves with ourselves, not going into 
spheres beyond our measure,’’ etc. This 
gives a connected sense, and is favoured 
by the fact that the balance of the sen- 
tence leads us to expect that αὐτοὶ after 


15. $S* om. yap after axpu. 


ἀλλὰ shall refer to the Apostle, and not 
to his opponents, as it must do with the 
longer reading. Nevertheless we believe 
that the omission is simply an attempt 
to evade the difficulty of the true text; 
it would be quite unlike St. Paul to speak 
of himself as his own standard of con- 
duct, and would not be harmonious with 
the thought of ver. 13. Others take 
συνιοῦσιν as a dative participle and 
adopt the rendering: “but we (͵.6., St. 
Paul) measure ourselves by ourselves, 
and compare ourselves with ourselves, 
unwise as we are”’ (sc., in their opinion). 
This, however, is not only .pen to the 
objection just mentioned, but would re- 
quire tots before οὐ συνιοῦσιν. On the 
whole, therefore, we prefer to follow the 
best MS. authoritv by reading συνιᾶσιν, 
and to treat the Western text as an ab- 
breviation, wrich misses the point of the 
argument ir. the attempt to simplify the 
construction. 

Ver. 13. ἡμεῖς δὲ οὐχὶ «.t.A.: but we 
will not glory beyond our measure (eis 
τὰ tepresenting the direction and extent 
of his boasting), but according to the 
measure of the rule which (οὗ for ὅν by 
attraction) God hath apportioned (see 
reff.) to us as a measure, to reach (the 
infin. of purpose) even unto you. κανών 
is a line of direction (see reff., and cf. 
Clem. Rom.. ὃ 41, μὴ παρεκβαίνων 





: 
| 


SS 








12—18, 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 99 


Χριστοῦ 15. οὖκ εἰς τὰ ἄμετρα καυχώμενοι ἐν “ἀλλοτρίοις " κόποις, Ὗ ἔστι. xiv. 


ἐλπίδα δὲ ἔχοντες, αὐξανομένης τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν,; ἐν ὑμῖν " μεγα- 


4, XV. 20; 
1 Tim, ν, 
22. 


λυνθῆναι κατὰ τὸν κανόνα ἡμῶν 2 eis "περισσείαν, 16. εἰς τὰ * Ref. νἱ. 5. 


y Phil. i. 20. 


"ὑπερέκεινα ὑμῶν εὐαγγελίσασθαι, οὐκ ἐν ἀλλοτρίῳ κανόνι εἰς τὰ 2 Reff-viii.2. 


» ἕτοιμα καυχήσασθαι. 


17. “Ὁ δὲ “καυχώμενος ἐν “ Κυρίῳ “ καυ- 


a Here only; 
cf. Amos 


v.2 


χάσθω -" 18. οὐ γὰρ ὁ “ ἑαυτὸν * cunotay,® ἐκεῖνός ἐστι * " δόκιμος, bR fh ix. 5. 


ἀλλ᾽ ὃν ὁ Κύριος συνίστησιν. 
d Ἀεβ, iii. x. 


1B has ἡμῶν for υμων. 


ε 
t Cor. i. 31 
(Jer. ix. 


e Rom. xiv. 18, xvi. 10; 1 Cor. xi. 19; chap. xiii. 7; 2 Tin. ii. 15. 


2 88 has vpev for nev. 


ὃ DcKL support συνιστων ; better συνιστανων with NBD*EGMP (cf. crit. notes 


on iii. 1, iv. 2). 


“S-BGKLMP, g support ἐστι Sox. ; but Sy*DE, d, e, f, τ, vg. give δοκιμος εστι. 


ὡρισμένον τῆς λειτουργίας αὐτοῦ κανόνα), 
and so here represents the ‘“ province” 
or sphere in which St. Paul conceives 
himself as appointed by God to proclaim 
the Gospel. He especially emphasises 
this here; to Corinth he has a “ mission,” 
as the Apostle of the Gentiles; his autho- 
rity over the Corinthian Church is not 
usurped, but has been divinely given 
him. 

Ver. 14. οὐ γὰρ ὡς μὴ κιτιλ.: for we 
stretch not ourselves overmuch, as though 
we reached not unto you (ὡς μή indicating 
that the case is only a hypothetical one; 
ef. 1 Cor. iv. 18); for we came (φθάνω 
being used as in modern Greek; see 
reff.) as far as unto you in the Gospel of 
Christ. Corinth was the westernmost 
point that he had reached. This verse, 
it will be observed, is parenthetical, and 
is introduced to make it clear that Corinth 
was part of his appointed sphere; cf. 1 
Cor. iii. 5, iv. 15, ix. 1. 

Ver. 15. οὐκ εἰς Ta ἄμετρα x.T.X.: 
not glorying beyond our measure (the 
argument is resumed from ver. 13), thatis, 
in other men’s labours. ‘This he steadily 
avoided (cf. Rom. xv. 20); even Rome 
itself was to be visited en route to Spain 
(Rom. xv. 24). But his Corinthian oppo- 
nents were not so scrupulous about in 
truding into another man’s sphere (1 Cor. 
ili. 10, iv. 15). --ἐλπίδα δὲ ἔχ. κιτιλ.: but 
having hope that, as your faith groweth 
og Eph. ii. 21, iv. 15, Col. i. 10, ii. 19. 
or intrans. use of αὐξάνειν, and cf. chap, 
ix. 10), we shall be magnified in you (cf. 
Acts v. 13) according to our rule, t.¢., our 
“line,” our apportionment of Apostolic 
work, unto further abundance, so as, etc. 

Ver. 16. εἰς τὰ ὑπερέκεινα K.T.A. : SO 
as to preach the Gospel in the regions 
beyond you, i.e. (if we are to press the 


idea of direction in ὑπερέκεινα), the 
western parts of Greece, Rome and 
Spain, which were “beyond,” if viewed 
from Jerusalem, the home of Christianity, 
whence St. Paul, like the other early 
preachers, received his ‘‘ mission” (more 
probably, however, ὑπερέκεινα is used 
quite vaguely as ἐπέκεινα is in Amos v. 
27, where the idea of direction cannot be 
read into it), and not to glory in another's 
“‘line”’ about things made ready to our 
hand. This is what the intruders had 
done at Corinth, whose Church St. Paul 
had founded (1 Cor. iii. 6). 

Ver. 17. ὁ δὲ καυχώμενος x.7.A.: but 
he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord, 
a quotation from the O.T. (see reff.) used 
before by St. Paul (cf. also Rom. xv. 18, 
t Cor. iii. 7). For not he that commendeth 
himself is approved (cf. Prov. xxvii. 2), 
but whom the Lord commendeth (cf. Rom. 
ii, 29, t Cor. iv. 5). And the Corinthian 
Church itself is his ‘ letter of commenda- 
tion” (iii. 2). 

CHAPTER XI.—Vv.1-4. He BEGs THEM 
TO BEAR WITH HIM IF HE STATES HIS 
CLAIMS AT LENGTH; IT IS NECESSARY 
TO DO SO BECAUSE OF THEIR READINESS 
TO ACCEPT NOVEL TEACHING.—Ver. I. 
ὄφελον ἀνείχεσθέ pov x.7.A.: would that 
ye could bear with me in a little (μικρόν 
τι only here and ver. 16; cf. Heb. ii. 7) 
foolishness. ἀφροσύνη = “ nonsense” 
(see ref. and cf. Rom. ii. 20, 1 Cor. xv. 36, 
Eph. v. 17). He thus deprecates his 
insistence on his claim to apostolic 
authority, and at the same time introduces 
with great skill a passionate statement of 
it-—@XAa καὶ ἀνέχ. μου : nay indeed bear 
with me ; 1.6., he not only utters a wish, 
but entreats them directly. Others (e.g., 
R.V. marg.) take ἀνέχ. as indic., 4.¢., 
“‘but indeed ye do bear with me”. 


100 


a 1 Cor. iv. 
; ν 


12. 
Ὁ Vv. 17, 21; 
. Vii. 


καὶ ἀνέχεσθε * pou. 


1; 


Vv. 17. 

ἃ Reff. vii. Ὶ 
gy.  e Here only. f Reff. vii. 11. 
13.  kReff.iv.2. 1 Reff. vii. 2. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINGIOYS B 


g Reff. iv. 14. 
m Reff, ii. 11. 


ΧΙ, 


ΧΙ. x. "Ὄφελον ; ἀνείχεσθέ 3 μου μικρὸν τῇ ὃ " ἀφροσύνῃ - ἀλλὰ 
2. "ζηλῶ γὰρ ὑμᾶς Θεοῦ ὅ ζήλῳ - " ἡρμοσάμην 
ΜΞ γὰρ ὑμᾶς ἑνὶ ἀνδρὶ, παρθένον ἁγνὴν " παραστῆσαι τῷ Χριστῷ" 3. 
ex Cor. xii > φοβοῦμαι δὲ " μή δ ἢ πως, ὡς ὁ ' ὄφις Εὔαν ® ' ἐξηπάτησεν év™ τῇ 
᾿ΠΚ πανουργίᾳ αὑτοῦ, οὕτω 8 ᾿ φθαρῇ τὰ “νοήματα ὑμῶν ἀπὸ τῆς 


h Chap. xii. 20; 6]. ἐν. 5. 1 Gen. iii, 


1 DcEGKL have ὠφελον (cf. 1 Cor. iv. 8); οφελον BMP. 
2 A few minuscules have odeAov ηνειχεσθε. 


’KLP support ty αφροσυνῃ; SBDEM 17 have (preferably) τι αφροσυνης, and 


there are minor variants. 
49 has adda και ἀνασχεσθε. 


5 For μηπως G has μηποτε and D* has py. 


5 DEKL, the Harclean, d, e, f, r, vg. support the order Ev. εἐξηπ.; but SBGMP 17, 


g and the Bohairic give εξηπ. Ev. 
7 D* omits ev. 


8 DbcEKLM, f, vg. and the Syriac support ουτω φθαρῃ; better om. ovrw (asa 
marginal gloss) with \3BD*GP 17, d, e, g, r and the Bohairic. 


Ver. 2. ζηλῶ yap ὑμᾶς κιτιλ.: for I 
am jealous over you with a godly jealousy 
(cf. Zech. i. 14, and for Θεοῦ ζήλῳ cf. 
Acts xxii. 3, Rom. x. 2; this ‘‘ jealousy” 
of St. Paulis on behalf of God); for I 
espoused you to one husband, that I might 
present you as a pure virgin to Christ, sc., 
at His Coming. The figure of Israel as 


a Bride presented to Jehovah as the Bride- 


groom was frequently used by the O.T. 
prophets (Isa. liv. 5, xii. 5, Hosea ii. 19) ; 
and, according to the Rabbis, Moses was 
the bridesman or paranymph. Here St. 
Paul conceives of himself as the para- 
nymph (cf. John iii. 29) who presents the 
Church asa pure Bride (cf. Rev. xxi. 2) 
to Christ, the heavenly Spouse, the ‘‘ one 
husband” to whom she is bound to 
remain faithful. Some critics have found 
here an echo of Christ’s words at Matt. 
ix. 15, xxv. I-12; but the similarity does 
not extend further than the employment 
of the same image demands. ἁρμόζω in 
the act. is regularly used of the father of 
the bride; in the pass. of the bride her- 
self (Prov. xix. 14); and in the mid. 
generally of the bridegroom, but some- 
times (as here) of others. 

Ver. 3.° φοβοῦμαι δὲ μή πως «.7.X.: 
but I fear lest by any means, as “ the 
serpent beguiled”’ Eve in his craftiness 
(in Gen. iii, x the serpent is called 
φρονιμώτατος, but St. Paul changes the 
word to indicate the baseness of the 
serpent’s wisdom. Aristotle uses πανουρ- 
γία in direct contrast to φρόνησις ; cf. 
Nic. Eth., vi., 12), your minds should be 
corrupted from the simplicity and the 


purity (cf. chap. vi. 6) that is toward 
Christ. It would appear that the belief 
of the synagogues was that the serpent 
literally ‘‘ seduced” Eve (cf. 4 Macc. 
xviii. 6-8, and Iren., contra Haer.,i., 307), 
and it is probably in reference to this 
that St. Paul substitutes the stronger word 
ἐξαπατάω (as he does at 1 Tim. ii. 14) for 
the simple verb dwar. of Gen. iii. 13. 
Carrying on the metaphor of ver. 2, he 
expresses his anxiety lest the Corinthian 
Church, the Bride of Christ, should be 
seduced by the devil from her singleness 
of affection (cf. 1 Macc. ii. 37, 60, and see 
on viii. 2 for ἁπλότης) and her purity, and 
so should be guilty of spiritual fornica- 
tion. He assumes that “the serpent” 
is to be identified with Satan, the tempter 
of mankind, as he does also at Rom, 
xvi. 20; the earliest trace of this identi- 
fication, which has become so familiar, is 
Wisd. ii. 24, cf. Rev. xii.9,xx.2. Henow 
gives the reason of his anxiety, lest they 
should fall away; viz., they were show- 
ing themselves too willing to listen to 
strange teachings. 

Ver. 4. εἰ μὲν yap ὁ ἐρχόμενος K.T.A.: 
for if he that cometh (ὃ ἐρχόμενος may 
point to some one conspicuous opponent, 
but it would not be safe to press this, or 
to lay stress on the verb as indicating one 
who comes without authorised mission, as 
at John x. 8; it is probably a quite in- 
definite phrase, “‘ if any one comes and 
preaches,” etc.) preacheth another Fesus 
whom we did not preach (not “ another 
Christ,” ‘*a new Messiah,” for of this 
the false teachers at Corinth were not 











haa ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B ΙΟΙ 


" ἁπλότητος ' τῆς εἰς τὸν 2 Χριστόν. 


4. εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὁ ἐρχόμενος " Refi. viii. 


ἄλλον “ Ἰησοῦν 8 “ κηρύσσει ὃν οὐκ ἐκηρύξαμεν, ἢ πνεῦμα ἕτερον © Acts ix. 


20, Xix. 13. 


λαμβάνετε ὃ οὐκ ἐλάβετε, ἢ εὐαγγέλιον ὁ ἕτερον ὃ οὐκ ἐδέξασθε, P Ver-8; 


καλῶς ἠνείχεσθε.ὅ 
ὑπὲρ λίαν ἀποστόλων. 


Rom. iii. 


5. Λογίζομαι γὰρ μηδὲν ἢ ὑστερηκέναι ἴ τῶν 23; 1 Cor. 


i.7; chap. 


6. εἰ δὲ 8 καὶ "ἰδιώτης " τῷ λόγῳ, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ xii. τι. 


q Chap. xii. 


1ronly. ΓΙ Acts iv. 13; 1 Cor. iv. 16, 23. 


ἐλ ΒΑ 17, g and the Harclean (with asterisk) give awo τῆς ἀπλοτητος και τῆς 
ayvorynros, which is adopted by W.H. and the R.V.; $9cDcKLMP, f, vg. and the 
Peshitto have only απὸ τῆς am. of the rec. text. 


2 BDEKLP support εἰς τον Xp. ; SGM omit τον. 


3G, f, g, vg. give Χριστον for Ἴησουν. 


46, g add AapBaverar after evayy. er. 


5’ BD* 17 have avexeoOe; but SDcEGKLMP have αἀνειχεσθε ; the rec. ἡνειχεσθε 


is found in cursives only. 


6 B has δε for yap, probably in mistaken reference to μεν of ver. 4. 
1 D*E, d, e, τ, etc., add ev υμιν after υστερ. 


8 Ὁ", d, ς, f, g give ει και. 


ilty; but “another Jesus,” ζ.6., a dif- 
rent representation of the historical 
Person, Jesus of Nazareth, from that 
which St, Paul put forward when at 
Corinth; see reff.), or if ye receive a 
different Spirit which ye did not receive, 
sc., a Spirit different from Him whom 
you received at your baptism (λαμβάνειν 
is the regular verb with πνεῦμα; cf. 
John xx. 22, Acts viii. 15, x. 47, xix. 2, 
Rom. viii. 15, 1 Cor. ii. 12, Gal. iii. 2; 
it expresses the co-operation of the will 
in a degree which δέχεσθαι, the verb 
used in the next clause of “ accepting” 
the Gospel, does not; see Acts vii. 38, 
xvii. rr, 1 Thess. i. 6, etc.), or a different 
Gospel which ye did not accept, sc., when 
the Gospel was first brought to you by 
me, ye bear with him finely! «ahas is 
ironical, as at Mark vii. 9 = praeclare. 
This facile acceptance of novelty is the 
cause of his anxiety; cf. 1 Cor. iii. 11, 
Gal. i. 6-8. Such instability is always a 
danger in the case of newly-founded 
Churches. 

Vv. 5-15. HE IS NOT INFERIOR TO 
MIS ADVERSARIES ALTHOUGH (a) HE IS 
NOT A TRAINED ORATOR (ver. 6), AND 
ALTHOUGH (δ) HE DID NOT CLAIM MAIN- 
TENANCE FROM THE CHURCH (ver. 7). 
THIS WAS NOT THROUGH WANT OF AF- 
FECTION FOR THEM, BUT THAT THERE 
MIGHT BE NO ROOM FOR CAVIL.—Ver. 
5. λογίζομαι yap «.r.A.: for I reckon 
that I am not a whit behind these super- 
fine Apostles; you receive them gladly; 
why not me? He then proceeds to re- 
fute the two reasons which were assigned 
for the disparagement of his apostolic 


9 D*E, d, ε, g give 18. expe. 


authority, viz., (a) he had none of the 
arts of a trained rhetorician, (b) he had 
not claimed maintenance from the Church 
of Corinth, which he had a right to 
do, if of genuine “ apostolic’’ rank. οἱ 
ὑπερλίαν ἀπόστολοι, “these superfine 
Apostles” is thus, as at xii. 11, an ironical 
description of the ψευδαπόστολοι (ver. 
13) against whom he is contending. 
The A.V. and R.V, render “the very 
chiefest Apostles,” i.e, the original 
Twelve, who received their commission 
directly from Christ, and _ especially 
Peter, James and John; but to introduce 
any mention of them here would be 
irrelevant, and would interrupt the argu- 
ment (they were ἰδιῶται ἐν λόγῳ), not to 
speak of the fact that ὑπερλίαν seems 
always in Greek literature to be used in 
an ironical sense, 

Ver. 6. εἰ δὲ καὶ ἰδιώτης τῷ λόγῳ 
κιτιλ.: buteven if I be rude in speech (see 
on x. 10; ἰδιώτης is a “layman,” who is 
without professional training), yet am I 
not in knowledge, sc., of divine things 
(see on viii. 7 for}Aéyos and γνῶσις) ; but 
in everything we have made it, sc., τὴν 
yraov, manifest (reading φανερώσαντες ; 
cf. Col. iv. 4) among all men (cf. 1 Cor. 
viii. 7, Heb. xiii. 4, or “in all circum- 
stances,”’ as at Phil. iv. 12) to you-ward. 
He claims that he both knows the truth, 
and has presented it to them openly and 
plainly (cf. chap. ii. 17, iv. 2). 

Ver. 7. ἢ ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησα x.T.A.: 
or did I commit a sin (note the irony) in 
abasing myself (cf. Phil. iv. 12), that 
ye might be exalted, sc., in spiritual 
privileges (cf. 1 Cor. ix. 11), because I 


102 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B ΧΙ, 
Ref rien τῇ γνώσει. ἀλλ᾽ "ἐν " παντὶ * pavepwhdvres} ev? πᾶσιν εἰς ὑμᾶς. 7. 
iss a 4° ἁμαρτίαν ἐποίησα, ἐμαυτὸν ὁ ταπεινῶν iva ὑμεῖς ὑψωθῆτε, ὅτι 

ats 2 ει. δωρεὰν τὸ τοῦ “ Θεοῦ ᾿ εὐαγγελίον εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν; 8. ἄλλας 
5 a : ἐκκλησίας “ ἐσύλησα, λαβὼν “ὀψώνιον πρὸς τὴν ὑμῶν διακονίαν " 


a 4 
xv.16;1 καὶ παρὼν πρὸς ὑμᾶς καὶ ἢ ὗ 


Thess. ii. 


στερηθεὶς, οὐ " κατενάρκησα οὐδενός ὅ " 


2,9;1Pet.g. τὸ γὰρ "ὑστέρημά μου " προσανεπλήρωσαν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ ἐλθόντες 


iv. 17. 

w Here 
only. 5 

x Luke iii. τηρήσω. 
14; Rom 
vi. 23; I 
Cor. ix. 7 
only; 1 
Macc. iii. ὦ 
2 


y Reff. ver. x 
A z Chap. xii. 14 only. 
d Reff. i. 12. e Rom. xv. 23; Gal. i. 21. 


‘od σφραγίσεται ἴ εἰς ἐμὲ ἐν τοῖς " κλίμασι τῆς ᾿Αχαΐας. 


a Reff. ix. 12; cf. i. Cor. xvi. 17. 
f Chap. xii. 2, 3. 


ἀπὸ Μακεδονίας " καὶ " ἐν " παντὶ "ἀβαρῆ ὑμῖν ἐμαυτὸν ἐτήρησα καὶ 
10. ἔστιν ἀλήθεια Χριστοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ, ὅτι ἡ “ καύχησις αὕτη 


11. διατί; 


ὅτι ὃ οὐκ ἀγαπῶ Spas; ὁ “Θεὸς ἦ οἶδεν - 12. ὃ δὲ ποιῶ, καὶ ποιήσω, 
ἵνα "ἐκκόψω τὴν ἢ ἀφορμὴν τῶν θελόντων ἀφορμὴν, ἵνα ἐν ᾧ καυχῶνται 


Ὁ Reff. iv. 8. 


ς Here only. 
g Rom. xi. 22. 


h Reff. v. 12. 


1 SgcDcEKLP, the Syriac and Bohairic support φανερωθεντες ; D*, d, e, f give 
φανερωθεις ; better φανερωσαντες with δ ΒΟ 17, δ. 
36, f, g, r, vg- and Peshitto omit ev πασιν. 


3G, ἢ, g, τ, vg. give ἡ μὴ ap. 


* DEGLP have eavrov for exavroy. 


5 DEGKL support ουδενος ; better ουθενος with BMP 17, 37. 
® KYcDEGL, g support vp. ἐμαυτον ; better epavrov υμιν with N*BMP 17, d. 5, 


f, vg.; K om. υμιν. 


7 σφραγισεται is a scribe’s blunder (supported by a few cursives only) for dpayy- 


σεται. 
8 B om. ort after διατι. 


preached to you the Gospel of God for 


nought ? 
Ver. 8. ἄλλας ἐκκλησίας ἐσύλησα 
κιτλι : I robbed other Churches, e.g., 


Philippi (Phil. iv. 15. He expresses him- 
self hyperbolically to bring out his mean- 
ing; συλᾷν is a very strong word, see 
Acts xix. 37, Rom. ii. 22), taking wages 
of them (ὀψώνιον primarily means the 
rations supplied to a soldier, and thence 
his pay ; see reff.), that I might minister 
unto you. διακονία is not used here in 
special reference to the collection for the 

udzan Christians, as it was at viii. 4, 
1X. I, 13, but in its most general sense ; 
cf. 2 Tim. iv. 11, Heb. i. 14.—Kal παρὼν 
K.t-.: and when I was present with you, 
i.e., during his first visit to Corinth (see 
Acts xviii. 1 ff.), and was in want (a con- 
dition which he recalls again, Phil. iv. 12), 
I was not a burden on any man. νάρκη 
is the torpedo-fish, which paralyses its 
victims by contact, and then preys upon 
them; so καταναρκᾷν signifies ‘‘to oppress 
heavily”. The compound verb is not 
found elsewhere in Greek literature (we 
have ναρκᾷν in Gen. xxxii. 25, Job xxxiii. 
19) ; Jerome says (Ep. cxxi. ad Algasiam) 
that it is a Cilicianism, like ἡμέρα in 1 
Cor. iv. 3. 


Ver. 9. τὸ yap ὑστέρημά pov K.T.A.. 
for the brethren, when they came from 
Macedonia (very likely Silas and Timothy; 
see Acts xviii. 5, Phil. iv. 15), supplied the 
measure of my want ; and in everything I 
kept myself (note the aorists as pointing 
to the definite period of his residence in 
Corinth) from being burdensome unto you 
(cf. xii. 16, τ Thess. ii. 6), and so will I 
keep myself. 

Ver. 10. ἔστιν ἀλήθ. Xp. x.7.A.: as 
the Truth of Christ (we have 4 ἀλήθ. το 
Θεοῦ, Rom. i. 25, iii. 7, xv. 8; cf. John 
xiv. 6, Eph. iv. 21) is in me (for the form 
of the asseveration see on i. 18; Rom. ix, 
1 is not a true parallel to the constr. here), 
this glorying, sc., in my independence, 
shall not be stopped, as far as I am con- 
cerned, in the regions of Achaia (see on 
i. 1); cf. vii. 14. The true reading is 
φραγήσεται; φράσσειν is ‘to fence,” 
but in N.T. (Rom. iii. το, Heb. xi. 33; 
cf. also Dan, vi. 22) is used with στόμα 
in the sense of “10 stop”’ the mouth, 

Ver. 11. διατί; ὅτι οὐκ ay. «.T.r.: 
wherefore ? because I love you not? God 
knoweth, i.e., that I do love you. 

Ver. 12. ὃ δὲ ποιῶ «.7.A.: but what I 
do, that I will do that, by refusing to 
accept maintenance gratis at your hands, 











7—15. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ 8 103 


εὑρεθῶσι καθὼς καὶ ἡμεῖς. 13. οἱ 1 γὰρ ' τοιοῦτοι * ψευδαπόστολοι, i Ref ii. 6. 


k Here only. 


ἐργάται * δόλιοι, ἱμετασχηματιζόμενοι εἰς ἀποστόλους Χριστοῦ 14. ! net 


καὶ οὐ θαυμαστόν 3: αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ ™ Σατανᾶς μετασχηματίζεται εἰς ὃ 


iii. 21; 4 
Mace, ix. 


ἄγγελον φωτός - 15. οὐ μέγα οὖν “ εἰ καὶ ot διάκονοι αὐτοῦ peta- 22. 


m Ref, ii. 


σχηματίζονται ὡς διάκονοι δικαιοσύνης, ὧν τὸ τέλος ἔσται ὃ κατὰ τὰ τ“. 


1G has ov yap for ot yap and omits εἰς before atroor. 
2 DbcEKLM support θαυμαστον ; better θαυμα (Rev. xvii. 6 only) with SBD*GPR 


17. 


8 D*, d, e, m give ws ayyeAos for εἰς ayy. 


4 Ὁ", ἃ, e, m and the Peshitto omit ovv. 


I may cut off the occasion (τὴν ἄφορμ.» 
the definite opportunity for attack which 
my opponents desire) from those who 
desire occasion that in the matter of their 
boast, sc., that as of Apostolic rank free 
maintenance was their rightful due, they 
may be found even as we, t.e., they desire 
that I and they may be on equal terms so 
far as the taking of money is concerned. 
It is better to regard the second ἵνα, not 
as in apposition with the first, but as 
dependent on θελ. ἀφορμ. and as express- 
ing the desire of St. Paul’s opponents, 
not his own, The situation seems to 
have been as follows: St. Paul held that 
the ‘labourer is worthy of his hire” 
(Luke x. 7, 1 Tim. v. 18), and in 1x Cor. 
ix. 11-13 he gives a clear exposition of 
the principle as applied to preachers of 
the Gospel. On these grounds he more 
than once (Phil. iv. 15, 16) accepted 
money from the generous Church of 
Philippi. But it was not his usual prac- 
tice. He reminds the Thessalonians (1 
Thess. ii. 9) that when with them he had 
worked for his living. So too he did at 
Corinth (Acts xviii. 2), any help he then 
accepted coming from Macedonia (chap. 
xi. 9); and he did the same at Ephesus 
(Acts xx. 34). Now his Corinthian oppo- 
nents were very ready to take money for 
their teaching (1 Cor. ix. 12) ; indeed they 
prided themselves on doing so, as it was 
the privilege of ‘‘ apostles’. This deter- 
mined St. Paul that it should never be 
truly said of him that he was a hireling 
teacher, and so he was especially careful 
at Corinth (1 Cor. ix. 15-19) to avoid even 
the appearance of grasping after money 
(cf. Gen, xiv. 23). This honourable in- 
dependence, however, created a difficul 

in two directions. On the one hand, it 
gave his opponents a handle for saying 
that he was not really of Apostolic rank, 
inasmuch as he dared not claim Apostolic 
privilege ; and, on the other hand, it hurt 
the feelings of his Corinthian friends that 


5 Ὁ", d, e, m have ἐστιν for εσται. 


he should refuse maintenance at their 
hands. His reply is contained in wv. 
7-12 of this chapter. And the point of 
ver. 12 is that his action is necessary, for 
if he were to take money as his opponents 
did, it would speedily be made a matter 
of cavil, and would tend to bring him 
down to their level (see also xii. 14). 

Ver. 13. οἱ yap τοιοῦτοι K.t.A.: for 
such men (this explains the ground of his 
determination in ver, 12 not to give 
opportunity for cavil) are βίοι apostles 
cf, Rev. il. 2. This speedy appearance 
of false teachers was one of the most 
remarkable features of the Apostolic age; 
of. Gal. ii. 4, Phil. i. 15, iii. 18, Tit. 
i, 10, 2 Pet. ii. 1, 1 John iv. τὴ, crafty 
workers (cf. Phil. iii. 2), fashioning them- 
selves into Apostles of Christ, i.e., laying 
special claim to that great title (cf. chap. 
x. 7). μετασχηματίζειν τι is to change 
the outward appearance (σχῆμα) of a 
thing, the thing itself in essence (μορφή) 
remaining unchanged (see reff.). 

Ver. 14. καὶ οὐ θαῦμα x.7.A.: and no 
marvel ; for even Satan fashioneth him- 
self into an angel of light. Light is the 
symbol of God (1 John i. 5, 1 Tim. vi. 
16) and His messengers (Matt. xxviii. 3, 
Acts xii. 7), as darkness is the symbol of 
Satan (Luke xxii. 53, Eph. vi. 12, Col. i. 
13). The μετασχηματισμός of Satan has 
just before been in the Apostle’s mind 
(ver. 3), and perhaps such passages as 
Gen. ili. 1, Job i. 6, 1 Kings xxii. 19-23 
sufficiently account for the image. But 
it is more probable that some Rabbinical 
tradition lies behind the word used by St. 
Paul; cf. Apoc. Moysis (v. 17) τότε ὃ 
σατανᾶς ἐγένετο ἐν εἴδει ἀγγέλου. A 
reference has been here found by Ewald 
to Matt. iv. 1-11, but while it is not im- 
probable that the Apostle had heard the 
story of the Lord’s Temptation, there is 
no Clear trace of it in his Epistles. 

Ver. 15. οὐ μέγα οὖν κιτιλ.: ἐξ is no 
great thing ἐμπεγφίογο, ἐγ his ministers also, 


104 ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYE B ΧΙ, 


5 Rom. fo. py αὐτῶν. 


xv. 36; 
ver. 19, 


chap. xii. 3 
ἃ 21: σωμαι 


16. Πάλιν λέγω, Μή τίς με δόξῃ " ἄφρονα εἶναι " εἰ 
δὲ μή} γε, κἂν ὡς ἄφρονα δέξασθέ με, ἵνα μικρόν 2 τι κἀγὼ καυχή- 
17. ὃ λαλῶ, οὐ“ λαλῶ κατὰ Κύριον, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐν “ ἀφροσύνῃ, 


Eph. ν. ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ " ὑποστάσει τῆς καυχήσεως - 18. ἐπεὶ πολλοὶ καυχῶνται 
o Reft. ver. “xara τὴν ® σάρκα, κἀγὼ καυχήσομαι. 19. ἡδέως γὰρ ἀνέχεσθε 
p Reff, ix.4.Tav ἀφρόνων, "ppdvipor ὄντες" 20. ἀνέχεσθε γὰρ, εἴ τις Spas 


q Reff. i. 17. 


r Rom. xi. "καταδουλοῖ, et τις *KateBier, εἴ τις λαμβάνει, εἴ τις " ἐπαίρεται, 


25, xii. 16 
(Prov. iii. 7); 1 Cor. iv. 10, X. 15. 


1 D* has py for μηγε. 


s Gal. ii. 4 only. 


t Mark xii. 40; Gal.v.15. ὦ Reff. x. 5. 


2 καγω pixpov τι is the order in all the best authorities; puxpov τι kayw only in a 


few cursives and the Harclean. 


3 DEKLPR give καυχήσομαι; καυχησωμαι, SBGM, 


4 The order ov λαλω κατα Kup. is found in DELM, d, e, τ, vg., the Bohairic and 
Harclean; better ov κατα Kup. λαλω with SSBGKPR, ἢ, g and the Peshitto. For 


κατα Κυριον f, r give kata Qeov. 


5 $$*D*GR 17, 73 give kata σάρκα ; ins. τὴν NCBDcEKLMP, 
6 The Armenian vs. adds after avex. yap, εἰ τις εξαπατᾳ υμας. 


sc., as well as himself, fashion themselves 
as ministers vid righteousness (see on iii. 
9); whose end, notwithstanding their dis- 
guise (cf. Rom. vi. 21, Phil. iii. 19), shall 
be according to their works (see on ver. 
10). 

Vv. 16-33. His APOSTOLIC LABOURS 
AND TRIALS.—Ver. 16. πάλιν λέγω k.7.X.: 
I say again (the first time having been in 
ver. 1), let no man think me foolish, 1.6., 
senseless with the ἀφροσύνη of self- 
praise ; but even if ye do (for εἰ δὲ μή ye 
cf. Matt. vi. 1, ix. 17, Luke xiii. 9, xiv. 
32), yet receive me as foolish (there is a 
somewhat similar ellipse in Mark. vi. 56, 
Acts v. 15), that I also, sc., as well as they 
(cf. ver. 18), may glory a little (μικρόν τι 
= “a trifle,” ‘‘a little bit”). 

Ver. 17. ὃ λαλῶ κιτ.λ. : what I speak, 
I speak not after the Lord, i.e., Christ 
(he refuses to claim Divine inspiration 
for his self-glorying; cf. 1 Cor. vii. 12, 
25), but as in foolishness, in this con- 
fidence of glorying (see on ix. 4 for 
ὑπόστασις). 

Ver. 18. ἐπεὶ πολλοὶ καυχῶνται κ-τ.λ.: 
seeing that many, sc., of the Corinthian 
Judaisers against whom this whole pol- 
emic is directed (cf. ii. 17, where they are 
also alluded to as of πολλοὶ), glory after 
the flesh, t.e., in external circumstances 
which are really no fit subject for glory- 
ing (see, on ἐν προσώπῳ, chap. v. 12 and 
reff.), I too will glory, sc., after the flesh ; 
i.¢., he proceeds to explain how much 
better external grounds he has for boast- 
ing than his Judaising rivals. 


Ver. 19. ἡδέως yap ἀνέχεσθε κ-.τ.λ.: 
for ye bear with the foolish, 1.e., the false 
teachers, gladly, being wise yourselves, 
the latter clause being, of course, ironical, 
although (see reff.) it was true that φρόν- 
yous was a quality which he had seriously 
ascribed to the Corinthians in a former 
letter. His point is that, as they have 
borne with the self-commendation of the 
pseudo-apostles, they should extend the 
same indulgent toleration to him. He 
then goes on to remind them of the in- 
solence and ill-treatment which they had 
endured at the hands of these self-con- 
stituted spiritual guides. 

Ver. 20. ἀνέχεσθε yap κ.τι.λ.: for ye 
bear with a man if he (we cannot press 
τις sO as to point to any special in- 
dividual; cf. x. 7) enslave you (in con- 
trast to any such tyranny, St. Paul 
describes himself as the δοῦλος of the 
Corinthians; see iv. 5, and cf. Acts 
xv. 10); if he devour you, i.e., robs you 
of your substance by greedily demand- 
ing maintenance, as these ‘superfine 
Apostles” did (see on ver. 12, and cf. 
Rom. xvi. 18, Phil. iii. 19); ἐγ he take 
you captive (λαμβάνειν is thus used of 
catching fish, Luke v. 5; οὔ. chap. xii. 
16. Field defends the A.V. ‘taketh of 
you,” i.e., takes money, by appealing to 
the Peshitto, and also by the usage of 
good Greek writers) ; if he exalt himself 
(cf. x. 12, xi, 18) ; if he smite you on the 
face. A blow in the face was, and is, a 
common form of insult in the East (cf. 1 
Kings xxii. 24, Matt. v. 39, xxvi. 67, 














16—23. 


εἴ τις Spas! εἰς πρόσωπον * δέρει. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


105 


21. κατὰ “dripiay λέγω, * ds Y Dia ix. 


*Sre ἡμεῖς ὃ "ἠσθενήσαμεν ὃ: ἐν ᾧ δ᾽ 4 ἄν τις "τολμᾷ, (ἐνδ "ἀφροσύνῃ ¥ Chap. vi. 
héyw,) τολμῶ κἀγώ. 22. " Ἑβραϊοί εἰσι; κἀγώ - ᾿Ισραηλῖταί εἰσι ; * mee: 
κἀγώ: σπέρμα “ABpadp εἰσι; κἀγώ": 23. διάκονοι Χριστοῦ εἰσι, y Ver. 29 


chaps. xii. 


(᾿ παραφρονῶν hadG,®) “ὑπὲρ “ἐγώ: ἐν “κόποις περισσοτέρως, ev? το, xiii. 3, 


ἃ πληγαῖς “ὑπερβαλλόντως, ἐν * φυλακαῖς περισσοτέρως, ἐν θανάτοις z Ref 2. 
Ε 


:, b Acts vi.1; Phil. iii. 5 only. 


6 . ver. 


cHereonly. d Reff. vi. 5. 


1 yas εἰς poo. is the order of DDKLM and the Peshitto; better εἰς προσ. υμας 
with §$BD*EGP 17, the Latins and Harclean, 


2G, g place ἡμεῖς after ἡσθεν. 


‘. : : ‘ 
ἡσθενησαμεν is supported by DEGKLMP;; better ἡσθενηκαμεν with NB 17, 37 
73. After ησθεν. DE, d, e and the Clem. vg. add ev τουτῳ τῳ pepe. ra 


4“ Ὁ", d, e, vg. and the Syriac have av for δ᾽ av. 
δ 6, g have ev adp. λεγω after τολμω kayo. 
ὁ DEG, the Latin and Peshitto give Aeyw for λαλω. 


7™BD*E 17, d, 6, f, vg. 
Weptoo., εν πληγ. ΩΣ 


(followed by W.H. and the R.V.) give the order εν φυλ. 
.» which we adopt ; the rec. text is supported by NcDbKLM, 


the Syriac and Bohairic vss. ; $¥G, g (followed by Tisch.) give ev wAny. περισσ.» ev 
φυλ. vrepB.; P has ev bud. viepB., ev wAny. περισσ.- 


Acts xxiii. 2, 1 Cor. iv. rx); and the 
despotic teachers whom the Corinthians 
tolerated had very likely inflicted this 
last indignity upon them. Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 
, Tit. i. 7, where it is forbidden to the 
ἴσκοποι to be “strikers”. ‘ Such are 
your teachers,” he says to them, “J 
am but weak in comparison with these 
strenuous spiritual directors.” 

Ver. 21. κατὰ ἀτιμίαν λέγω κ-.τ.λ.: 
by way of disparagement, sc., humbly of 
myself, I say that we, i.e., 1 myself, ἡμεῖς 
being ironically emphasised, have been 
weak,i.e., 1 have not attempted to enforce 
my authority in any of these directions 
(J. x. ro and 1 Cor. ii. 3). He now 
changes his tone from irony to direct and 
masterful assertion, and in the splendid 
passage which follows he makes the 
*boast”’ which he has been leading up 
to with such prolonged explanations,— 
ἐν ᾧ δ᾽ ἄν VES He and yet whereinsoever 
any man is bold (I speak in foolishness— 
this he is careful to add once more; see 
ver. 17), 1 am bold also. His whole life 
will justify him. 

Ver. 22. ἝΒβραϊοί εἰσι; κἀγώ: are 
they Hebrews? so am I. At a later 
period the term ‘EBpaios was not con- 
fined to Palestinian Jews (Eus., H.E£., 
ii., 4, 2, iii, 4, 2), but expressed mere 
nationality. However in the N.T. it is 
used in contrast with Ἑλληνιστής (Acts 
vi. 1; cf. Phil. iii. 5), and denotes a Jew 
who retained his national language and 


customs. Jerome states (de Vir. ill.) that 
St. Paul was born in Gischala of Galilee, 
but this cannot be true in the face of his 
own statement that he was born in Tarsus 
(Acts xxii. 3).—"lopanAciratl elow; κἀγώ: 
are they Israelites? soamI. The term 
Israelite expresses the sacred character of 
the nation, like the term Qvuirites for 
Romans, and is always used in the N.T. 
as a term of praise (John i. 48, etc.).— 
σπέρμα ᾽Αβρ. x.t.A.: are they the seed of 
Abraham? soamI. This is the highest 
dignity of all, to be an inheritor of the 
Messianic promises given to Abraham 
(cf. for the phrase Isa. xli. 8, John viii. 
33, Rom. ix. 7, Gal. iii. 29). In the two 
parallel soapy θὲς, Rom. xi. 1, Phil. iii. 5, 
he adds that he is of the tribe of Benja- 
min—a fact which probably accounts for 
his name ‘‘Saul” (1 Sam. ix. 1). It 
shows how strong the Judaising party 
were at Corinth that he thinks it im- 
portant to put this proud statement of 
his descent in the forefront of his apology. 

Ver. 23. ϑιάκονοι Xp. «.7.d.: are they 
Christ’s ministers? (as they specially 
claimed to be; cf. x. 7)—I speak as one 
beside himself (sc., as if he would say 
“‘this is mad boasting indeed; for what 
office can be higher than this?”); I am 
more, ἴ.6., 1 am that in a higher degree 
than they (ὑπέρ being used adverbially), 
as is proved by my trials in the service of 
the Gospel, The summary which follows 
is of deep interest for the student of St. 


106 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


ΧΙ, 


e Hereonly. πρλλάκις. 24. ὑπὸ Ιουδαίων " πεντάκις τεσσαράκοντα "παρὰ “μίαν 


fx Tim. i. 
19 only. 

ἔ Here only. 
Here 
only; Pss. 


ἔλαβον, 25. τρὶς éppaPdioOny,? ἅπαξ ἐλιθάσθην, τρὶς * ἐναυάγησα, 
εγυχθήμερον ἐν τῷ " βυθῷ πεποίηκα 26. 'Ψ ὁδοιπορίαις πολλάκις ὃ" 


xviii. 16, Κὶ κινδύνοις ποταμῶν, κινδύνοις λῃστῶν, κινδύνοις ἐκ ' γένους, κινδύ- 


i John iv 6 vous ἐξ ἐθνῶν, κινδύνοις ἐν πόλει, κινδύνοις ἐν ™ ἐρημίᾳ, κινδύνοις ἐν 
on 


k Rom. viii. 35 only. 12 Macc. xii. 31. 


m Mark viii. 4; Heb. xi. 38. 


1 The preferable spelling is τεσσεράκοντα with \B*DE, 
® The preferable spelling is epaBSio6yv with all the uncials except Μ, 
5 D*, d, e and the Peshitto give πολλαῖς fos πολλακις. 


Paul’s life; he goes into more definite 
detail than elsewhere (cf. 1 Cor. iv. 11-13, 
chap. iv. 7-10, vi. 4-10), and gives us a 
more vivid picture of his extraordinary 
labours than would be possible to form 
from the narrative in the Acts alone. It 
will be remembered that his missionary 
career lasted for ten or eleven years after 
this Epistle was written, and that there- 
fore we cannot regard these verses as 
giving us a complete list of his trials.— 
ἐν κόποις K.T.A.: in labours more abun- 
dantly, sc., than they (cf. 1 Cor. xv. 10), 
in prisons more abundantly (up to this 
point in his life we only know of one 
imprisonment, viz., at Philippi, Acts xvi. 
23, but there must have been others; 


q- Rom. xvi. 7, where he speaks of 
d 


ronicus and Junias as having been 
his “‘ fellow-prisoners ’’ on some occasion 
to which no other allusion had been pre- 
served. Afterwards we read of his being 
imprisoned at Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 33), 
at Czsarea (Acts xxiii. 35) and at Rome 
(Acts xxviii. 30), besides which the evi- 
dence of the Pastoral Epistles gives 
another Romanimprisonment. Clement 
of Rome (§ 5) speaks of St. Paul as seven 
times in bonds; cf. vi. 5 above), in 
stripes above measure, details of which are 
given in the following verses (cf. Acts 
xxi. 32), in deaths oft, i.e., in frequent 
perils of death (cf. Acts ix. 23, xiv. 19, 
etc., and chaps. i. 10, vi. 9). 

Ver, 24. ὑπὸ *lov’. κιτιλ.: of the 
Fews five times received I forty stripes 
(there is an ellipse of πληγάς as at Luke 
xii. 47) save one. The Law forbad more 
than forty stripes (Deut. xxv. 3); and, to 
be on the safe side, it was the custom in 
the judicial scourgings of the synagogues 
(Matt. xxiii. 34, Acts xxii. 19) to stop 
short at thirty-nine. This punishment 
was 80 severe that death often ensued 
(cf. Josephus, Antt., iv., 8, 21); we know 
nothing of the circumstances under which 
it was inflicted on St. Paul. 


Ver. 25. τρὶς ἐραβδίσθην x.7.X.: thrice 
was I beaten with rods, t.e., “ virgis 
caesus sum,” a Roman, as distinct from 
the Fewish, method of scourging—dis- 
tinct too from flagellation with thongs 
(Matt. xxvii. 26). It was forbidden in 
the case of a Roman citizen by the Lex 
Porcia, but nevertheless St. Paul had 
endured it at Philippi (Acts xvi. 23, 37), 
and barely escaped it at Jerusalem (Acts 
xxii. 25). We do not know the other two 
occasions alluded to.—dmwag ἐλιθάσθην 
K.T.A.: once was I stoned, i.e., at Lystra 
(Acts xiv. 19, and almost at Iconium, ver. 
5), thrice I suffered shipwreck, of the 
circumstances of which we have no 
record, for the shipwreck on his voyage 
to Rome (Acts xxvii.) was subsequent to 
this, a night and a day have I been (there 
seems to be no special reason here for 
the perf. in preference to the aorist) ix 
the deep, probably after one of the ship- 
wrecks (cf. Acts xxvii. 44). For ποιεῖν 
with words of time cf. Acts xv. 33, xx. 3, 
Jas. iv. 13. 

Ver. 26. ὁδοιπορίαις πολλ. K.7.A.: in 
journeyings often (of the extent of which 
the Acts gives us some idea; their dangers 
are now enumerated), in perils of rivers, 
sc., from swollen torrents dangerous to 
ford (Stanley notes that Frederick Bar- 
barossa was drowned in the Calycadnus, 
not far from Tarsus; see Ramsay, The 
Church in the Roman Empire, p. 23, for 
several illustrations of the dangers of the 
Pisidian highlands), in perils of robbers, 
on account of whom travelling in Asia 
Minor was, and still is, dangerous (the 
district of Perga and Pamphylia which 
St. Paul traversed on his first missionary 
journey was notorious for brigands; see 
Strabo, xii., 6, 7), in perils from my kin- 
dred, i.e., persecutions at the hands of 
the Jews which he had suffered (see 
Acts ix. 23, 20, xiii. 50, xiv. 5, 19, XVii. 
5, 13, xviii. 12, 1 Thess. ii. 15), and from 
which he was yet to suffer more (Acts 














ae ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 107 


9 ᾿ . lo Gal. ii. 
θαλάσσῃ, κινδύνοις ἐν " ψευδαδέλφοις - 27. ἐν᾽ “κόπῳ Kal ° μόχθῳ, "Ὁ eh 
ἐν " ἀγρυπνίαις πολλάκις,2 ἐν “ λιμῷ καὶ * Siper,® ἐν Pvnoreiars πολ- “1 rer 

2 ay Ud ὶ 4 Say) ‘< way. " ὃς, ἡ Thess. iii. 
sige Ἂν went καὶ ᾿ οὐ ; i χωρίῳ: Τὴν πο δα ay 

πισύστασ v ὧν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν. P Reff. vi. 5. 

ba is μὸν ἧ καθ᾽ ἡμ pay, ἡ ; μέριμνα bg vt ἢ CA παν ail 

29. τίς " ἀσθενεῖ, καὶ οὐκ ἀσθενῶ ; τίς ἡ σκανδαλίζεται, καὶ οὐκ ἐγὼ δοξῶν 

re only. 

5 Acts xxviii. 2. u Mark iv. 19; Luke xxi. 34; 1 Pet. v. 7. 


t Matt. v. 32; Acts xxvi. 29 only. 
v Reff. ver. 21. 


w Rom. xiv. 21; 1 Cor. viii. 13. 


1 SscKLMP, f, vg., etc., support ev κοπῳ ; better om. ev with N*BDEG, d, e, δ. 





2 Ὁ", d, e, f, vg. and the Peshitto have πολλαῖς (twice) for πολλακις. 


5. B has διψη. 


*KLMP support επισυστασις ; better εἐπιστασις with BDEG 17 (cf. Acts xxiv. 


12) and vg. = instantia. 


δ᾽ ScDEKLMP, f, g, vg. support pov; better por with *BG 17. 


XX. 3, Xxi. 31, xxiii. 12, xxv. 3), in perils 
from the Gentiles, as, e.g., at Iconium 
(Acts xiv. 5), at Philippi (Acts xvi. 20) 
and at Ephesus (Acts xix. 23), im perils 
in the city (Acts xxi. 31 and passim), in 
the desert (Arabia(?), Gal. i. 17), in the 
sea, 4.e., in town and country, by land 
and by water, in perils among false 
brethren, i.e., probably the Judaisers who 
were his bitter opponents (cf. ver. 13 and 
Gal. ii. 4). 

Ver. 27. κόπῳ καὶ μόχ. K.T.A.: in 
labour and travail, in watchings often 
(see on vi. 5), in hunger and thirst (cf. 1 
Cor. iv. 11, Phil. iv. 12), in fastings often, 
i.é., plainly, in involuntary deprivation 
of all food (the idea of voluntary de- 
votional fastings is quite foreign to the 
context here, and to bring it in spoils the 
rhetorical force of the passage; see on 
vi. 3) in cold and nakedness (cf. 1 Cor. 
iv. 11). 

Ver. 28. χωρὶς τῶν παρ. x.t.A.: be- 
sides the things which I omit (see reff., 


and cf. Heb. xi. 32; the A.V. “those 


things that are without’ = vulg. quae 
sunt extrinsecus, is wrong), there is that 
which presseth upon me daily, anxiety 
for all the churches (see on viii. 18). 
ἐπισύστασις of the rec. text means a 
combination for hostile purposes, and is 
used of Korah’s rebellion in Num. xvi. 
40, xxvi. 9, in which latter place we have 
the same textual variants as here (cf. also 
rt Esdr. v. 73). This may be the true 
reading, both here and at Acts xxiv. 12, 
for the syllable ov might readily drop 
out in transcription. If it be adopted 
here it would refer to the cabals of the 
Apostle’s adversaries = “the daily com- 
bination against me,” and would thus 
indicate a trial distinct from “the care 
of all the churches,” which is next 


mentioned. But, although this gives a 
good sense, we prefer to read ἐπίστασις 
as better supported both here and at 
Acts xxiv. 12 (the only places of its 
occurrence in N.T.). Polybius uses the 
word as = “‘ attention,” “" close observa- 
tion,” but this will not suit Acts xxiv. 
12. It is foundin 2 Macc. vi. 3 as = 
“ visitation ” or ** pressure,” and the latter 
rendering seems best to satisfy the con- 
text here. We have therefore followed the 
Revisers in adopting the Vulgate render- 
ing instantia = “that which presseth,” 
and in taking ἡ μέριμνα κιτιλ. as in 
apposition with ἡ ἐπίστασις. 

Ver. 29. τίς ἀσθενεῖ κιτ.λ.: who is 
weak, sc., in prejudice (as at Rom. xiv. 1, 
1 Cor, viii. 11), and I am not weak, i.e., in 
Christian sympathy (cf. 1 Cor. ix. 22 
ἐγενόμην τοῖς ἀσθενέσιν ἀσθενής) ; who 
is made to stumble, and I burn not ? i.e., 
with the fire of righteous indignation (cf. 
πυρωθείς = “inflamed” at 2 Macc. iv. 
38). The word ἀσθενῶ now suggests to 
him a new thought, that it is in his weak- 
ness as supported by God’s grace rather 
than in any strength of his own that his 
real boast may be made. 

Ver. 30. εἰ καυχᾶσθαι x.t.A.: if I 
must needs glory, I will glory of the things 
that concern my weakness (cf. chap. xii. 5, 
g), such as are the perils and indignities 
which he has recounted in the preceding 
verses, 

Ver. 31. ὁ Θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ κ.τ.λ.: 
the God and Father of the Lord Fesus, 
who is blessed for evermore (see on i. 3, 
and for ὁ @v as applied to God, “the 
self-existent one,” cf. Exod. iii. 14, 
Wisd. xiii. 1, Rev. i. 8), knoweth that I 
lie not (cf. xii. 6). This solemn assevera- 
tion belongs (see reff.) to what follows, 
and not to the statements which precede 


108 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B 


ΧΙ, 30—33. 


x1 Cor. vil. ¥ πυροῦμαι ; 30. εἰ καυχᾶσθαι δεῖ, τὰ τῆς 7 ἀσθενείας pou! καυχή- 


9; E 
31. 


. 4. μαι. 
sieht, γα 


Ὁ 3 "Θεὸς καὶ "πατὴρ τοῦ "Κυρίου ἡμῶν 8 "᾿Ιησοῦ 


32. ἐν Δαμασκῷ ὁ ἐθνάρχης ᾿Αρέτα τοῦ βασιλέως * ἐφρούρει 


a Rom.i.25, τὴν Δαμασκηνῶν > πόλιν, πιάσαι με θέλων δ. 33. καὶ διὰ * θυρίδος ἐν 


ix. 5; Ps. 
Ixxxviii. 


3. 
b Tre. ix. 1; Gali.go; 1 Tim. ii. 7. 
only. f Acts ix. 25, xxvii. 17. 


1B om. pov. 


*capydvy ᾿ἐχαλάσθην διὰ τοῦ τείχους, καὶ ἐξέφυγον τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ. 
ς Gal. iii. 23; Phil. iv. 7. 


ἃ Acts xx.gonly. 6 Here 


2 D*E, d, e have o Θεος του Ἰσραηλ. 


3 S8BGKL, g and the Harclean omit npewv; ins. DEMP, d, e, f, vg. the Peshitto 


and Bohairic. 


4 DEKLMP, d, e, f, vg. the Peshitto and Bohairic support Χριστου ; om. NBG 


17, 37, g and the Harclean. 


5 DbKLM support Aap. πολιν ; the preferable order is πολιν Aap. with SBD*EGP 


17, 37 and the Latins. 


6 BD*, d, 6, f, vg. and the Peshitto omit θελων ; ins. S8DcEKLMP and (before 
πιασαι pe) G, g, the Bohairic and Harclean. 


it. If the text is not corrupt, it would 
seem that the Apostle intended now to 
illustrate in detail the providence which 
overruled his life, the ‘‘ strength which 
was perfected in weakness,” and that, be- 
ginning with one of the earliest and least 
dignified perils of his career as a Christian 
missionary, he then is led off through 
some train of ideas which we cannot trace 


into the quite different subject of his» 


“visions” and “revelations,” which 
diverts him from his original intention. 
If, on the other hand, we might suppose 
Vv. 32, 33 to be a marginal gloss (founded 
on Acts ix. 23-25, and perhaps introduced 
in reference to the κίνδυνοι ἐκ γένους of 
ver. 26) which was not part of the 
original text—though possibly an auto- 
graph addition made after the letter was 
finished—the argument would be quite 
consecutive. He feels the remarkable 
account in xii. 2-4 to be so incredible 
that he thinks it right to prefix the strong 
asseveration of ver. 31 that he is telling 
the truth. But there is no MS. authority 
for thus treating vv. 32, 33. 

Ver. 32. ἐν Δαμασκῷ ὁ ἐθν. x... : 
in Damascus the ethnarch under Aretas 
the king guarded the city of the Dama- 
scenes, sc., by placing a watch at the 
gates, to take me ; and through a window 
(i.¢., an aperture in the city wall, or the 
window of a house overhanging the wall) 
was I let down ina basket (σαργάνη is 
anything twisted, and so here probably a 
rope basket; σφυρίς is the word used in 
Acts ix. 25) by the wall, and escaped his 
hands, The incident took place on St. 
Paul’s return to Damascus from Arabia 


(Gal. i. 17) and is narrated in Acts ix. 
23-25. The date of it is important in the 
chronology of the Apostle’s life. It 
could not have been before a.p. 34, for 
coins of Tiberius prove Damascus to have 
been under direct Roman administration 
in that year. Tiberius was unlikely to 
have handed Damascus over to Aretas 
(fourth of the name), the hereditary chief 
(cf. 2 Macc. v. 8) of the Nabathean 
Arabs ; for up to the close of the reign of 
Tiberius military operations were being 
carried on against Aretas by the legate of 
Syria. Hence Damascus was probably 
not ceded to Aretas until the reign of 
Caligula, and consequently this episode 
in St. Paul’s life cannot have taken place 
before the middle of a.p. 37. Instigated 
by the Jews (Acts ix. 23), the “ ethnarch,”’ 
or provincial governor of Damascus under 
Aretas (cf. 1 Macc. xiv. 47), laid a plan for 
the arrest of the Apostle which was frus- 
trated by St. Paul’s escape in the manner 
described (cf. Josh. ii. 15, 1 Sam. xix. 12). 
CHAPTER XII.—Vv. 1-6. THE ApPos- 
TLE’S VISION: IF HE CHOSE, HE COULD 
BOAST OF IT.—Ver. 1. With Tisch., 
W.H. and the R.V. we adopt the read- 
ing (see crit. notes): καυχᾶσθαι Set + 
οὐ συμφέρον μέν, ἐλεύσομαι δὲ κ-.τ.λ.: 
I must needs glory, though it is not ex- 
edient (sc., my opponents drive me to 
it); but I will come to visions such as 
were seen by Daniel (x. 1), which were 
predicted as to be granted in the New 
Dispensation (Joel ii. 28 f., quoted in 
Acts ii. 17), which were seen by St. 
Peter (Acts x. ro), and by St. John (Rev. 
i, 10, iv. 1), as well as by St. Paul him. 














ee 
— = + 


XII, 1—4. ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 109 


XII. 1. Καυχᾶσθαι! 8)? οὐ συμφέρει ὃ μοι ἐλεύσομαι yap “5 Lukei. 22, 


xxiv. 23; 
εἰς "ὀπτασίας ὅ καὶ ἀποκαλύψεις Κυρίου. 2. οἶδα ἄνθρωπον ” ἐν ae 
" Χριστῷ πρὸ ἐτῶν δεκατεσσάρων, (εἴτε “ ἐν “ σώματι,ἷ οὐκ οἶδα - εἴτε Cr a τ 


4 ἐκτὸς ὁ τοῦ ὃ σώματος, οὐκ οἶδα - ὁ " Θεὸς " οἶδεν ") ἡ ἁρπαγέντα ἃ τ Cor. vi 
τὸν τοιοῦτον ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ. 3. καὶ οἶδα τὸν τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον, & Chap. xt. 
(εἴτε ἐν σώματι, εἴτε ἐκτὸς " τοῦ σώματος, οὐκ" οἶδα ὁ Θεὸς οἶδεν) ἢ Acts viii. 





4. ὅτι ἡρπάγη εἰς τὸν " παράδεισον, καὶ ἤκουσεν ἢ ἄρρητα ῥήματα, & 


xii. 5. 


1 
hess. iv. 
17; Rev. 


g Luke xxiii. 43; Rev. ii. 7 only. h Here only. 


1 g9¢, f, vg. prefix e before xavy. (from xi. 30). 


2 KM support δη; 
and Syriac vss. have Set. 


D* and the Bohairic give δε; BDcEGLP 17, 37, the Latin 


53 DcEKL and the Harclean support ovpdeper por; D* and the Peshitto give 
συμφερει without por; better συμφερον μεν with BGP 17, 67**, f, g, vg. and the 


Bohairic. 


4 yap is read by DEKL and the Syriac vss.; better δὲ with QB (which adds καὶ) 


GP 17, 73, f, δ, vg. and the Bohairic. 
5 GP have εἰς τα(ς) οπτ. 
7 D*E* have ev τῳ cop. 


δ G, g give Χριστου for Kuptov. 
8 B om. του before cwparos. 


9 S3DbcE**GKLMP support exrog (from ver. 2); BD*E* have xwpts, which is 


perhaps preferable. 


10 B om. ov« οιδα, and accordingly W.H. bracket the words. 


self (Acts ix. 3, cf. 1 Cor. ix. 1, Acts ix. 
12, xxii. 17) and revelations of the Lord, 
sc., revelations granted by Christ (Rev. i. 
1). St. Paul Pataereg egrets that he 
received his message ἀποκαλύψεως 
Ἴη. Xp. (Gal. i. 12, Eph. iii. 3; cf. 1 Cor. 
xi. 23, xv. 3) ; On one occasion he went 
up to Jerusalem κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν (Gal. 
ii. 1); and he claims to have the power 
of speaking ἐν ἀποκαλύψει (1 Cor. xiv. 
6), as had also some of his Corinthian 
converts (1 Cor. xiv. 26). He now men- 
tions one signal instance of such a 
“vision and revelation” which was 
vouchsafed to him. 

Ver. 2. οἶδα ἄνθρ. ἐν Xp. «.t.d.: 1 
know (not “1 knew” as the A.V. has it) 
a man in Christ, i.e., a Christian (see 
reff,), fourteen years ago (for the constr. 
πρὸ ér. Sex. cf. John xii. 1)—whether in 
the body, I know not ; or whether out of 
the body, I know not (the words dis- 
tinctly indicate St. Paul’s belief that 
perception is possible for a disembodied 
spirit) ; God knoweth—such an one caught 
up to the third heaven. Cf. Ezek. viii. 
3. ‘*The Spirit lifted me between the 
earth and the heaven, and brought me 
in the visions of God to Jerusalem.” 
The date of this trance must have been 
about 41 or 42 A.D., years of which we 
have no details so far as St. Paul’s life 
is concerned; probably he was then at 


Tarsus (Acts ix. 30, xi. 25; cf. the refer- 
ence to St. Paul in the dialogue Philo- 
patris, ὃ 12: ἐς τρίτον οὐρανὸν ἀερο- 
βατήσας). The mention of “the third 
heaven”’ raises interesting questions as 
to Jewish beliefs. There is no doubt 
that a plurality of ‘‘ heavens” is recog- 
nised all through the O.T. (see, 4.9.» 
Deut. x. 14, 1 Kings viii. 27, Neh. ix. 
6, Ps. Ixviii. 33 and cxlviii. 4); but 
it has been matter of dispute whether 
the Rabbinical schools recognised seven 
heavens or only three. However it is now 
fairly well established that, in common 
with other ancient peoples (e¢.g., the Par- 
sees, and probably the Babylonians), the 
Jews recognised seven heavens. This 
view not only appears in the pseud- 
epigraphical literature, but in some of 
the Fathers, ¢.g¢., Clement of Alexandria. 
Its most detailed exposition is found in 
the Book of the Secrets of Enoch, a Jewish 
apocalypse written in Greek in the first 
century of our era (now only extant ina 
Sclavonic version). In chap. viii. of 
this work we find that Paradise is ex- 
plicitly located in the “third heaven,” 
which is the view recognised here by 
St. Paul (see Charles’ Sclavonic Enoch, 
pp. xxxi. ff.). 

Vv. 3,4. καὶ οἶδα τὸν τοιοῦτον κιτ.λ.: 
and I know such a man (he speaks 
with such caution and reticence of this 


IIo 


i Reff. xi. 30. 5 

k Ref. ape δὲς γᾷ ἀνθρώπῳ 
eff. i. 23. ἡ οὐ 

eer rk ὑπὲρ δὲ ἐμαυτ 

n 2 Thess. 


fir on 6. ἐὰν yap θελήσω 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


λαλῆσαι. 


XII, 


5. ὑπὲρ τοῦ τοιούτου καυχήσομαι " 


οὐ καυχήσομαι, εἰ μὴ ἐν ταῖς ᾿ ἀσθενείαις pou.? 
καυχήσασθαι, οὐκ ἔσομαι ἢ ἄφρων - ἀλήθειαν γὰρ 


o Here o ly. ἐρῶ - ᾿ φείδομαι δὲ, μή τις els ἐμὲ λογίσηται ὑπὲρ ὃ βλέπει pe, ἢ 


p Reff. ii. 11. υ 
ᾳ Markiv. ἀκούει τι 3 ἐξ ἐμοῦ. 
65; 1 Cor. cain 
iv. 11. 7. Kat τῇ 


™ ὑπερβολῇ τῶν ἀποκαλύψεων ἵνα “ μὴ " ὑπεραίρωμαι,5" 


ἐδόθη μοι “σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκὶ, ἄγγελος "Σατᾶνδ ἵνα με * κολαφίζῃ, 


2 D* has wept Se for υπερ δε. 


2 BD* 17, 67**, d, e, the Syriac and Bohairic vss. om. pov ; ins. $DcEGKLMP, 


f, g, vg. (cf. ver. 9). 


3 \9cD*E*KLP, d, e, f and the Harclean support axove. τι; better om. τι with 
No*BDcE**G 17, 37, g, the Peshitto and Bohairic vss. 


4 The best authorities ΑΒΕ 17 read 810 before wa; it is omitted by DEKLP, 
the Latin and Syriac vss., ‘‘ a characteristic Western attempt to deal with a difficulty 


by excision ”’ (Hort). 
5 DELP give vrepatpopat. 


6 secA**DbcEKLP and the Harclean margin support Σαταν ; better Σατανα with 
Sy*A*BD*G 17*, 67**, the Bohairic and Latin vss. (Σαταν is indecl. in 1 Kings xi, 
14, but the form in N.T, is always the declinable Zaravas). 


momentous event in his spiritual life that 
he will not even describe it in the first 
person) ... how that he was caught 
up into Paradise (see previous note), and 
heard unspeakable words which tt ts not 
lawful for a man to utter; such words 
are reserved for the Divine voice which. 
speaks to man, although this restriction 
does not apply to all Divine words. 

Ver. 5. ὑπὲρ τοῦ τοιούτου K.T.A.: On 
behalf of such an one will I glory, but on 
mine own behalf, i.e., of myself in my 
normal state, I will not glory save in my 
weaknesses, as he has already done, xi. 
23 ff. 

Ver 6. ἐὰν yap θελήσω καυχ. K.T.A.: 
we must supply a suppressed clause: 
** And yet, as you see, if I did choose to 
boast, I should keep within the truth”’ is 
the sense. For if I should desire to glory, 
I shall not be foolish (cf. xi. 1 and ver. 11), 
for I shall speak the truth (xi. 31); but I 
forbear, lest any man should account of 
me above that which he seeth me to be 
or heareth from me. He is anxious that 
he should be judged, not by his report of 
his own spiritual experiences, but by his 
laborious and painful life in the service of 
the Gospel. It is instructive to notice 
that he does not bring forward this vision 
as evidence of the truth of doctrine; he 
only mentions it incidentally and with 
reserve as a Divine manifestation of 
which he might legitimately boast, if he 
chose. On the other hand, he appeals to 
the fact that he had seen the Risen Christ 


(1 Cor. ix. 1, xv. 8) as of great evidential 
importance, which indicates that he be- 
lieved that vision to be “objective” ina 
sense in which the visions of an ecstatic 
trance are not. 

Vv. 7-10. His “THORN IN THE 
FLESH ”’.—Ver. 7. καὶ τῇ ὑὕπερβ. τῶν 
ἀποκ. If we read διό, these words ought 
either to be taken with the concluding 
words of ver. 6 (as by W.H.), or—regard- 
ing ver. 6 asa parenthesis—with ver. 5 
(as by eam Neither gives a satis- 
factory sense, and we therefore follow the 
R.V. in regarding the construction as 
broken. He says and by reason of the 
exceeding greatness of the revelations— 
and then suddenly changes the form of 
the sentence.—816 ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρ. κιτ.λ.: 
wherefore, that I should not be exalted 
overmuch, there was given to me, sc., by 
God (as at 1 Cor, xi. 15, xii. 7, Gal. ii. 
21), a thorn in the flesh, an angel of Satan 
(who is regarded as having power over 
the σάρξ, Luke xiii. 16, 1 Cor. v. 5, Job 
ii. 5), that he might buffet me (see reff.), 
the pres. tense indicating that this 
‘“‘buffeting’’ was not a single isolated 
trial but continual, that I should not be 
exalted overmuch. In classical Greek 
σκόλοψ means a “‘stake,’’ and this is 
given as an alternative rendering in the 
R.V. margin. Thus the Apostle’s trial 
would be likened to a continual “ impale- 
ment”. Stanley, who adopts this render- 
ing, compares Gal. ii, 20 “ I am crucified 
with Christ”, But in the Greek of the 








5-9. 


iva? μὴ " ὑπεραίρωμαι. 


κάλεσα, ἵνα "ἀποστῇ ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ - 9. καὶ εἴρηκέ μοι, "᾿Αρκεῖ σοι ἡ 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


II! 


8. ὑπὲρ 3 τούτου τρὶς ὃ τὸν Κύριον mape-r Luke iv. 


13;1 Tim. 
vi. 5. 


χάρις μου" ἡ γὰρ δύναμίς μου ὁ ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ τελειοῦται. ἥδιστα ot Tin. 
οὖν μᾶλλον καυχήσομαι ἐν ταῖς ἀσθενείαις μου," ἵνα * ἐπισκηνώσῃ ¢ ἄρδω 


1 The second twa μη υὑπεραιρ. is omitted by $*ADEG 17 and the Latin vss.; but 
is found in §°¢BKLP, the Syriac and Bohairic vss., and is printed by Tisch. and W.H. 


2A has και ὑπερ. 


8. D*E, d, 5 and the Bohairic give row Kup. τρις. 


4 ScA’DbcEKLP, the Syriac and Bohairic vss. support pov after Suv. ; better om. 
with §§*A*BD*G and the Latins, but the sense is not affected. 


5 τελειουται, NCDcCEKLP;; better rekerrar with S*ABD*G. 
* B 67**, the Harclean and Bohairic vss. om. pov after ασθ, ; ins. SADEGKLP, 


the Latin, Peshitto and Sahidic vss. 


LXX (see Num. xxxiii. 55, Hosea ii. 8, 
Ecclus. xliii. 19) σκόλοψ undoubtedly 
means “thorn,’’ not “stake” (Ezek, 
xxviii. 24 is, perhaps, doubtful). Illus- 
trations of its use in this sense also 
occur in Artemidorus, Babrius and the 
medical writers (see Field im loc. and 
Hermathena, xix., p. 390); ¢.g., of the pain 
of cutting a tooth itis said ὅταν ἐμπέπαρ- 
μένος ἦ σκόλοψ σαρκί (Comm. in aph. 
Hippocr., 25). We hold, then, that 
σκόλοψ here certainly means “ thorn,” 
and that St. Paul’s trial is compared to 
the vexatious irritation of a thorn rather 
than to the agonising and fatal torture 
of impalement on a stake. We have no 
knowledge as to what this trial was. It 
is a mere fancy, and not a happy one 
(probably suggested by the Latin stimulus 
carnis), that it consisted in violence of 
sensual passions (cf. contra 1 Cor. vii. 7-9 
and ver. 9 below). That the σκόλοψ is an 
individual opponent who was a “ thorn 
in his side” (cf. x. 7, xi. 14) was held by 
Chrysostom; Ephraim Syrus identifies 
him with Alexander the coppersmith (2 
Tim. iv. 14)! But this guess hardly ex- 
plains σαρκί; the trial was not of the 
Spirit, but in the flesh. It seems likely on 
the whole that it was a bodily infirmity, 
probably the ἀσθένεια τῆς σαρκός of Gal. 
iv. 13. Jerome (Gal., iv., 13) and Ter- 
tullian (de Pudic.,13) mention the tradition 
that it was headache ; this was probably (if 
there be any truth in the tradition) only 
asymptom. Another view (supported by 
the Celtic name for the disease) is ef2- 
lepsy, a disease to which “visionaries” 
are said to be prone, but which afflicted 
two such strong men as Napoleon and 
Peter the Great. Those who hold this 
view generally point to the circumstances 
of St. Paul’s conversion as illustrating an 
attack of the disorder. But this at least 


is excluded by the Apostle’s own words; 
the “thorn in the flesh” was “ given” 
him after the “ vision” of fourteen years 
before; i.¢., this infirmity came upon him 
after the year 41. Another plausible con- 
jecture (see Farrar, St. Paul, Excurs. xi., 
but cf. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 
p- 39) is that the Apostle suffered from 
ophthalmia (cf. Acts ix. 9, Gal. iv. 15, 
vi. 11), a very common disease in the 
East. Prof. Ramsay (loc. cit., p. 94 ff.) 
thinks it was chronic malarial fever. 
Whatever his infirmity was, it apparently 
affected the dignity of his outward appear- 
ance (Gal. iv. 14), and was evident to the 
eye. For a full discussion of the various 
theories on the subject see Lightfoot, 
Galatians, p. 186 ff. 

Ver. 8. ὑπὲρ τούτου τρὶς x.7.A.: con- 
cerning this thing (or “this angel”; for 
ὑπέρ = “ concerning” see on 1. 8) I be- 
sought the Lord, i.e., Christ (see ver. 9), 
thrice that it (or “he”’) might depart 
from me. “Thrice” seems to point to 
three special occasions, when his prayers 
for the removal of his trial were specially 
urgent. Like Another who prayed thrice 
that the cup of suffering might pass from 
Him (Matt. xxvi. 44), St. Paul did not 
receive the answer his spirit longed for. 
But he did receive an answer abundantly 
sufficient to strengthen and to console. 

Ver. 9. καὶ εἴρηκέ μοι κιτ.λ.: and He 
hath said (note the perf. as expressing 
the abiding validity of the Divine pro- 
mise; so often in quotations from the 
O.T., ¢.g., Acts xiii. 34, Heb. iv. 4, x. 9) 
to me, ‘‘My grace is sufficient for thee 
(cf. Isa. xliii. 2), for My power is being 
made perfect (τελεῖσθαι is found here 
only; the tense indicates a continuous 
fact in St. Paul’s life) in weakness”. So 
it is said of Christ that He was “ made 
perfect through sufferings ” (Heb. ii. 10); 


112 


u Reff. v. 8. , 
v Reff. xi. én 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= B 


ἐμὲ ἡ δύναμις τοῦ Χριστοῦ. 


XII. 


10. διὸ " εὐδοκῶ ἐν * ἀσθενείαις, ἐν 


wo heat vis ὕβρεσιν, ἐν “ ἀνάγκαις, ἐν * διωγμοῖς, év? “΄ στενοχωρίαις, ὑπὲρ 

x παρ oom Χριστοῦ - ὅταν yap "ἀσθενῶ, τότε δυνατός εἶμι. 11. Γέγονα "ἄφρων 

vil 35: 2 καυχώμενος 3: ὑμεῖς pe ἠναγκάσατε. ἐγὼ γὰρ ὥφειλον ὑφ᾽ ὑμῶν 
ess. 1, 


432 Tim.* συνίστασθαι " οὐδὲν yap 
iii. rt. 5 
y Reff. xi. εἰ καὶ οὐδέν εἰμι. 
21. 
z Reff. xi. 
16. 
a Reff. iii. 1. 


b Reff. xi.5. ς Reff. iv. 17. 


1 A om. ev διωγμοις. 


4bde 


στέρησα τῶν ἢ ὑπὲρ λίαν " ἀποστόλων, ᾿ 


12. Τὰ μὲν σημεῖα τοῦ ἀποστόλου “κατειργάσθη ὅ ἐν ὑμῖν ἐν πάσῃ 
d Reff. viii. 7. 


2 s9cDEGKLP support ev orev. ; better kat orev. with *B. 


3 LP and the Syriac vss. support the explanatory gloss kavywpevos after adp. 
om. S$ABDEGK, the Latin and Egyptian vss. 


4 Bins. τι after yap (W.H. place it in their margin); G has ov yap. 
5 ssAB°KL support κατειργασθη ; B*DEG have κατηργασθε. 


and of the power which He communicates 
from Himself the same law holds good. 
Cf. Isa. xl. 29-31.—Stora οὖν κιτιλ.: 
most gladly therefore will I rather glory in 
my weaknesses (sc., rather than that they 
should be removed), that the power of 
Christ (see on vi. 7 and reff. there) may rest 
upon me, lit., ‘may spread a tabernacle 
over me”. The image is that of the 
Shechinah or σκηνή, the glory which 
was the symbol of the Divine presence 
in the Holy of Holies, descending upon 
the faithful (cf. John i. 14, Rev. vii. 15, 
xxi, 3). The two renderings (“ strength” 
and “ power ”’) of δύναμις in the A.V. of 
this verse are preserved (although inter- 
changed) in the R.V. by a curious in- 
advertence on the part of the Revisers, 
who are generally scrupulous even to 
pedantry in maintaining uniformity in 
such matters. 

Ver. το. διὸ εὐδοκῶ κιτ.λ.: wherefore 
I am well content in (for εὐδοκεῖν ἐν cf. 
2 Sam. xxii. 20, Matt. iii. 17, 1 Cor. x. 
5) weaknesses, in insults (ὕβρις is used 
for ‘‘injury” to a ship in Acts xxvii. 10, 
21; it does not occur elsewhere in N.T.; 
but cf. ὑβρίζειν, Acts xiv. 5,1 Thess. ii. 
2), in necessities, in persecutions and dis- 
tresses, for Christ’s sake (cf, Matt. v. 11); 
for whenever I am weak, then am I 
strong. .Wetstein compares Philo’s τὸ 
ἀσθενὲς ὑμῶν Sivapls ἐστι (Vit. Mos., i., 
§ 13). St. Paul’s words are more than 
a verbal paradox: they express the fact, 
to which history abundantly testifies, 
that the world’s throne is the Cross. 

Vv. 11-13. THE FOREGOING TESTI- 
MONY TO HIS CLAIMS OUGHT TO HAVE 
COME FROM THE CORINTHIANS WHO 
WITNESSED HIS APOSTOLIC LABOoURs. 


—Ver. τσ. γέγονα ἄφρων" ὑμεῖς κιτιλ.: 
I am become foolish, sc., boasting thus: ye 
compelled me, 4.é., it was your doing; for 
I ought to have been commended by you 
(cf. iii. 1, 1 Cor. ix. 1), t.¢., you should 
not have left it to me to speak my own 
praises: for in nothing was I behind the 
superfine Apostles, whom you trust so 
readily, although I am nothing, sc., in 
God’s eyes of John viii. 54, 1 Cor. iii, 

Of the Apostles properly so called, 
St. Paul caHs himself ὁ ἐλάχιστος (1 
Cor. xv. g) ; but he will not admit for a 
moment the superiority of the Corinthian 
Judaisers. 

Ver. 12. τὰ μὲν σημεῖα «tA: truly 
(there is no antithesis to μέν) the signs 
of an Apostle (τοῦ is generic, ‘such as 
might be expected from an Apostle”; cf, 
Mark. xvi. 20) were wrought (note the 
passive; he does not claim to be any- 
thing more than God’s instrument ; 
οὐδέν ἐστι) among you in all patience, 
sc., on my part (ὑπομονή is an essential 
quality for a Christian missionary; see 
on i, 6), in signs and wonders and powers. 
This direct assertion, made as if it were 
indisputable, that miracles had been 
wrought at Corinth through his agency 
(see also Rom. xv. 19, i Cor. ii. 4) 
is noteworthy. The three words used 
should be distinguished. τέρας is some- 
thing anomalous, outside the ordinary 
course of nature. This, however, is not 
the prominent idea in the N.T. miracles; 
τέρας is never used in the N.T. (save in 
the quotation Acts ii. 19) except in com- 
bination with onpetov=a “sign” of 
the Divine purpose. σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα 
is the regular phrase both in O.T. 
(Exod. vii. 3, etc.) and in the N.T. for 











{0-15. 


5 ὑπομονῇ, ev! “σημείοις καὶ ἦ τέρασι καὶ ᾿ δυνάμεσι. 
ἐστιν ὃ ἡττήθητε 2 ὑπὲρ ὅ τὰς λοιπὰς ἐκκλησίας ; εἰ μὴ ὅτι αὐτὸς * 
ἐγὼ οὐ "κατενάρκησα ὑμῶν: " χαρίσασθε μοι τὴν ἀδικίαν ταύτην. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOY= Β 


112 


, e Reff. i. 6. 
13. Tt yap f Acts ii, 223 


Rom. xv. 
19; 2 
Thess. ii. 


9; Heb. ii. 


14. ἰδοὺ tpitov® ' ἑτοίμως ' ἔχω ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, kai οὐ “katavap- 4: 


κήσω ὑμῶν δ: οὐ γὰρ ᾿ ζητῶ τὰ ὑμῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑμᾶς. 


οὐ γὰρ ὀφείλει 


τὰ τέκνα τοῖς γονεῦσι "᾿ θησαυρίζειν, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ γονεῖς τοῖς τέκνοις “ ἱ Acts xxi. 


15. ἐγὼ δὲ ἥδιστα δαπανήσω 7 καὶ " ἐκδαπανηθήσομαι ὑπὲρ τῶν 
ψυχῶν ὑμῶν εἰ καὶ περισσοτέρως ὑμᾶς ἀγαπῶν “ἧττον ἀγαπῶμαι. ; 


24, 33, xiii. 53 Phil. ii. a1. 


m 1 Cor. xvi. 2. 


13; Dan. 
iii. 15. 
k Chap. xi. 8 
only. 
1 Cor. x. 


n Here only. Οἱ Cor. xi. 17 only. 


1 DcEKLP and the Bohairic support ev σημειοις ; SQ2AD*, d, 6, f and the Har- 
clean give σημειοις ; G, g and the Peshitto καὶ onp.; NYS τε onp.; better onperors 


τε with §*B 17, 73- 


2s9cADbecKLP support ἡττηθητε; better ἡσσωθητε with Q*BD". 


3 DE give παρα for ὑπερ. 


4 G and the Latin vss. give eyw avros. 


5 SSABG, the Latin, Syriac and Sahidic vss, have τριτον tovro (DE and the 
Bohairic give tovro tptrov) ; om. tovto KLP (cf. xiii. 1). 


6 DbcEKL, the Latin, Syriac and Egyptian vss. support καταναρκ. vpwv; D*G 
have vpas for υμων ; om. υμων SAB 17, 73. 


7 D*E, ἃ, e add και exSarravynow after δαπανησω. 


8 NceDbcEKLP, f, vg. and the Syriac vss. support εἰ kat; om. εἰ και D*d, e, δ; 


om. καὶ ΑΒΕ 17 and the Egyptian vss. 


9 scBDEGKLP and the Latin vss. support ayawwv; better ayarw with 9*A 17 


and the Egyptian vss. 


“miracles”; but it is their signal rather 
than their wonderful character upon 
which stress is laid. To describe them 


as δυνάμεις (Matt. vii. 22, Acts xix. 11, 


t Cor. xii. 10, 28) directs attention to 


the Omnipotent Being to whom they are 


due. 

Ver. 13. τί γάρ ἐστιν ὃ hoo. κ-.τ.λ.: 
for what is there wherein ye were treated 
_ as inferior (cf. 2 Pet. ii. 19) to the rest of 
the churches, except indeed that I myself 
_ did not burden you? Cf. Acts xx. 33, 1 
Cor. ix. 12 and ver. 16. The emphatic 
αὐτὸς ἐγώ may indicate that it was only 
he himself (and not his colleagues) who 


_ ‘tefused maintenance (see on xi. 12). 


This was the only σημεῖον τοῦ ἀποσ- 
τόλου which he did not exhibit at Corinth, 
and he ironically adds, Forgive me this 


wrong. 


_ Vv. 14-18. THAT HE DID NOT CLAIM 
_ MAINTENANCE AT CORINTH WAS DIS- 
INTERESTED ON HIS’ PART.—Ver. 14. 
ἰδοὺ τρίτον τοῦτο «.7.A.: behold this is 
the third time that I am ready to come 
to you. While these words only express 
that he had been ready to go twice before, 
they are quite consistent with the hypo- 
thesis, required by xiii. 1, 2 and ii. 1 
(see Introd., p. 5), that he had actually 
VOL, III, 


paid two previous visits to Corinth, the 
first of which is described in Acts xviii. 
That we have no details of the second is 
no argument against its having taken 
place.—xal οὐ καταναρκ. «.7.A.: and I 
will not be a burden to you, following in 
this my practice on the two former 
occasions; for I seek not yours but you; 
for the children are not bound to lay up 
for the parents, in which relation he 
stands to them (1 Cor. iv. 14 f., cf. Gal. iv. 
19), but the parents for the children (cf. 
Prov. xix. 14). See on xi. 12 for St. 
Paul’s principles of action in this matter. 

Ver. 15. ἐγὼ δὲ ἥδιστα «.7.A.: and I 
will most gladly spend and be wholly 
spent for your souls’ sake (F. chap. i. 6, 
Rom. ix. 3, Phil. ii. 17, 1 Thess. ii. 8, 2 
Tim. ii. τὸ for the like expressions of 
unselfish devotion). ψυχή is here used 
(as at Heb. xiii. 17, 1 Pet. ii. 11) of the 
spiritual part of man, the interests of 
which are eternal.—ei περισσοτέρως ὑμᾶς 
ἀγαπῶ «.t.A.: if I loved you more abun- 
dantly, 1.6., than I love other Churches 
of my foundation (cf. xi. 11), am I loved 
less (sc., than I am loved by other 
Churches)? Is it thus that you requite 
my affection ? 

Ver. 16. ἔστω δὲ «.t.d , but he it sof 


114 
p Here 
᾿δόλῳ ὑμᾶς ἔλαβον. 
αὐτοῦ " ἐπλεονέκτησα ὑμᾶς ; 


lv. 2. 
τ Rom. i. 29; 


ii. 3. 

s Reif ii. xr. πνεύματι περιεπατήσαμεν 4; 

t Here only. Μ P biden : 

u Rom. iv. 
12; I Pet. 
ii. 21. 

v Acts xxiv, 
10; Rom. ii. 15. 


“~ 


Θεοῦ 
w Chap. ii. 17. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


XII, 


16. Ἔστω δὲ, ἐγὼ οὐ ᾿κατεβάρησα3 ὑμᾶς, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπάρχων “ πανοῦργος 
17. μή τινα ὧν ἀπέσταλκα πρὸς ὑμᾶς, δι᾿ ἢ 


18. παρεκάλεσα Τίτον, καὶ " συναπέσ- 


1 Thess. τειλα τὸν ἀδελφόν ὅ" μή τι ἐπλεονέκτησεν ὑμᾶς Τίτος ; οὐ τῷ αὐτῷ 
οὐ τοῖς αὐτοῖς " ἴχνεσι ; 

19. Πάλιν ὃ δοκεῖτε ὅτι ὑμῖν " ἀπολογούμεθα ; ἥ κατενώπιον ὅ too? 
ἡ ἐν " Χριστῷ “ λαλοῦμεν " τὰ δὲ πάντα, " ἀγαπητοὶ, ὑπὲρ τῆς 
x Reff. vii. 1. 


149G have κατεναρκησα vpwv (from ver. 13) for κατεβαρησα υμας. 


2 G, f, g, vg. om. δι᾿ αὐτου. 


8 Some editions of the Peshitto suggest αδελφους for αδελφον, but it is doubtful if 


there is a Greek variant behind their texts. 


4G, g add after weprerarnoapev (from xiii. 2), ort eav ελθω παλιν ov φεισομαι., 


> \9cDEKLP, g, the Syriac and Bohairic vss. support παλιν ; better παλαι with 
Ny*ABG 17, 67**, d, 6, f, vg. with a period after awodoy. 


6 DEKLP support κατενωπῖον ; better κατέναντι with ΑΒΕ (cf. ii. 17). 
7 sgcDbcEKL support του Θεου ; better om. του with S*ABD*GP 17, 37 (cf. ii. 


17). 


I did not myself burden you (cf. xi. 9 and 
ver. 13). This the Corinthians grant as 
indisputable, but they allege ἃ sinister 
reason, viz., being crafty (for ὑπάρχων 
see on viii. 17) I caught you (see on xi. 
20) with gutle (cf. iv. 2, μὴ περιπα- 
τοῦντες ἐν πανουργίᾳ κηδὲ δολοῦν- 
τες «.T.A.). That is, his adversaries 
hinted that, although he did not accept 
maintenance directly, yet the collection 
made for the Judzan Christians was 
under his hand, and that he was not 
above suspicion in his disposal of it. To 
this he returns an indignant denial, and 
appeals directly to their own observation 
of the messengers whom he had sent, of 
whom Titus (at least) had met him in 
Macedonia with a report (vii. 6) and was 
sent back to Corinth with two companions 
to complete the business, carrying this 
letter (viii. 6, 18 ff.). 

Ver. 17. μή τινα ὧν κ-.τιλ, : of those 
whom (ὧν by attraction for ἐκείνων οὕς) I 
have sent, was there one by whom I took 
advantage of you? The constr. is broken, 
and the resulting anacoluthon is one of 
the most striking in St. Paul’s writings 
(cf. Rom. viii. 3, Gal. i. 20). 

Ver. 18. παρεκάλεσα Τίτον x.7.A,: 
I exhorted Titus (see on viii. 6), and I 
sent the brother with him. This was the 
mission from which Titus’ return is re- 
corded above (vii. 6). We do not know the 
name of his companion ; but it is highly 
probable that Titus and this ἀδελφός are 
the ἀδελφοί who were the bearers of the 


former letter to Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 12). 
-- μή τι ἐπλεονέκτ. «.t.A.: surely Titus 
took no advantage of you ? walked we not 
ἐν, Titus my emissary and I mysel 
ry the same spirit and in the same ist 
It is plain that Titus’ first mission had 
been admirably fulfilled, and that the 
Corinthians had recognised his single- 
mindedness and sincerity (see vii. 13). 
To their good opinion of him St. Paul 
might fairly point, for Titus, after all, had 
only carried out his instructions. 

Vv. 19-21. His GLORYING HAS NOT 
BEEN BY WAY OF APOLOGY, BUT TO EDIFY 
THEM UNTO REPENTANCE. — Ver. 10. 
πάλαι δοκεῖτε «.t.A.: ye are thinking 
this long time (i.e., since they read xi, 1 ff.; 
for πάλαι cf. Matt. xi. 21, Heb. i, 1, 2 Pet. 
i. 9) that we are excusing ourselves to you, 
which is very far from his intention (cf. 1 
Cor. iv. 3). On the contrary, in the sight 
of God speak we in Christ (as he had said 
before, 1i. 17). But all the things, 56., 
which we speak, beloved, are for youredify- 
ing, sc., of which you sorely stand in need, 

Ver. 20. φοβοῦμαι yap «.7.A.: for I 
fear lest by any means, when I come, I 
should find you not such as I would, and 
should myself be found of you such as ye 
would not, t.e., indignant to severity at 
their backsliding δ x. 2), lest by an 
means there should be strife (cf. τ Cor. i. 
II, iii. 3), jealousy, ragings (this seems to 
be the force of the plur. θυμοί; cf. Wisd. 
vii. 20), factions (ἐριθεῖα is derived from 
ἔριθος, a hired labourer, and signifies a 














16—21. 


ὑμῶν 7 οἰκοδομῆς. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Β 


115 


20. "φοβοῦμαι γὰρ, "μή *mws ἐλθὼν οὐχ οἵους ¥ Ref. χ. δ. 


z Reff. xi. 3 


θέλω εὕρω ὑμᾶς, κἀγὼ εὑρεθῶ ὑμῖν οἷον οὐ θέλετε - μή πως * Epers,) 5 Rom. i. 29, 


ἡ ζῆλοι,2 “ θυμοὶ, “ ἐριθεῖαι, " καταλαλιαὶ, ᾿ ψιθυρισμοὶ, " φυσιώσεις, 


xiii. 13; 
Gal. v. 20; 
Phil. i. 15. 


ἢ ἀκαταστασίαι" 21. μὴ πάλιν ἐλθόντα ὃ pe ταπεινώσῃ * 16 ' Θεός b Rom. xiii. 


13; «Cor. 


‘nou πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ πενθήσω πολλοὺς τῶν " προημαρτηκότων, καὶ μὴ iil. 3; Gal. 


Vv. . 
μετανοησάντων ἐπὶ τῇ " ἀκαθαρσίᾳ καὶ '™°mopveta καὶ '™ ἀσελγείᾳ ς Rom. il 8; 
al. V. 20; 


ἡ ἔπραξαν. tare 
1; Col. 
ii. 8. d Rom. ii. 8; Gal. v. 20; Phil. i. 17, ii. 3. 61 Pet. ii. 1 only; Wisd. i. 11. ‘i f Here 
only. μ᾽ Here only; c/. 1 Cor. iv. 6, 18, v. 2, viii. 1, h Reff. vi.5. i Rom. i, 8; Phil. i. 3, iv. 
Philm. 4. k Chap. xiii. 2 only. 1 Gal. v. 19. m Eph. v. 3; Col. iii. 5. n Eph. iv. 19. 


19; 
ΟἹ Cor. v. 1, Vi, 13, 18, vii. 2. 


1 BDEGKLP, the Latin, Egyptian and Harclean vss. give epets; Tisch. and 
W.H. read epis with NA 17 and the Peshitto. 


2 NDbcEKLP, the Latin, Egyptian and Harclean vss. support ζηλοι ; Tisch. and 
W.H. read {ndos with ABD*G 17 and the Peshitto. 


SsgcDcKL support ελθοντα pe; better ελθοντος pov with δ ΓΑ ΒΑΡ, placing pe 


after ταπειν. 


* SAK support ταπεινωσῃ ; BDEGLP have ταπεινώσει. 


mercenary cabal), backbitings, whisper- 
ings (i.¢., open and secret defamation of 
character), swellings, i.e., insolences, 
tumults (see on vi. 5). Cf. Jas. iii. 16, 
ὅπου γὰρ ζῆλος Kal ἐριθεία, ἐκεῖ ἀκατα- 
στασία, 

Ver, 21. μὴ πάλιν ἐλθόντος μου 
κιτιλ. : lest when I come, my God should 
humble me again before you, sc., because 
of the scanty fruit of his preaching (as 
had been the case on his second visit), 
and I should mourn for many (observe, 
not ‘‘all”) that have sinned heretofore, 
j.¢., before my second visit, and did not 
_ repent, t.¢., after my second visit (we thus 
_ retain the force of the aorist part; for 
μετανοέω see on vii. 9, and for μετανοεῖν 
ἐπὶ cf. Joel ii. 13, Amos vii. 3), of the 
_ uncleanness and fornication and lascivi- 
ousness which they committed. There is 
nothing in the anxiety here expressed 
which is inconsistent with the language 
of vii. 9 ff. There he expresses his satis- 
faction that in the matter of the incestuous 

son the Corinthians had obeyed his 

irections; but their proneness to sins of 

the flesh he is fully alive to. See, «.g., 
Vi. 14, vii. 1. 

CuaPTeR XIII.— Vv. 1-10. 
COMES AGAIN, HE WILL NOT SPARE: 
CHRIST IS HIS STRENGTH; LET THE Cor- 
INTHIANS SEE TO IT THAT HE BE THEIRS 
ALSO.— Ver. 1. τρίτον τοῦτο x.7.A.: 
this is the third time I am coming to you. 
‘At the mouth of two witnesses or three 
Shall every word be established.”’ That is, 
he will hold a formal enquiry in the strict 


IF HE 


legal way (see reff.) when he arrives. No 
evasions will be possible. 

Ver. 2. προείρηκα καὶ προλ. «.7.A.: 
I have said beforehand (at chap. x. 6, 11, 
xii. 21), and I do say beforehand, as when 
I was present the second time (Ὁ. ii. I, 
xii, 14), so now being absent, to them that 
have sinned heretofore, i.e., before my 
second visit (as at xii. 21), and to all the 
rest, 4.¢., any more recent offenders, that 
if I come again I will not spare. It was 
“to spare” them that he had paid hither- 
to no further visit after his second (i. 23). 
He proceeds to give the reason why he 
will not “spare” if such a visit should 
be necessary; viz., they have challenged 
his Apostolic authority. 

Ver. 3. ἐπεὶ δοκιμὴν «.t.A.: seeing 
that ye seek a proo py Christ speaking in 
me (cf. Matt. x. 20), i.¢., a proof that Iam 
really an “Apostle” with a “mission” 
from Christ to speak in His Name. 
This last thought leads him into a short 
digression. “Ἧς who has thus com- 
missioned me is not weak, but strong, 
and this paradoxical strength in weak- 
ness is mine also” (vv. 3b, 4).—és εἰς 
ἡμᾶς κιτιλ, : who is not weak in relation 
to you, sc., as you think me to be (x. 10, 
xl. 21), but ts powerful in your midst. 
And this is true for two reasons: (a) be- 
cause of His Resurrection, as the Victor 
over Death; (δ) because of the strength 
with which He empowers us in the dis- 
charge of our duty to you. Each of 
these reasons is now introduced by καὶ 
yap. 


116 


a Chap. xii. 
14; Num. 
xxii. 28 ; 
Judges 
xvi. 15; 
John xxi. 


14. 
b Deut. xix. 


ΠΡΟΣ KOPINOIOYS B 


XIII. 


XIII. 1. " Τρίτον ᾿ " τοῦτο ἔρχομαι 2 πρὸς ὑμᾶς - ““" ἐπὶ ὃ " στό- 
ματος δύο μαρτύρων καὶ τριῶν σταθήσεται πᾶν ῥῆμα. 


2. “προεί- 


ρηκαὃ καὶ “ προλέγω ὡς ὅ παρὼν τὸ δεύτερον, καὶ ἀπὼν νῦν γράφω ἴ 
τοῖς “ προημαρτηκόσι, καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς πᾶσιν, ὅτι, ἐὰν ἔλθω εἰς 


τσ (Matt. τὸ πάλιν, οὐ ἦ φείσομαι: 3. ἐπεὶ ὃ " δοκιμὴν ζητεῖτε τοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ 


Xvili. 16; 


Nhu v. λαλοῦντος Χριστοῦ, ὃς εἰς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἢ ἀσθενεῖ, ἀλλὰ ᾿ δυνατεῖ ἐν 
10). 

¢ Chap. vil. ὑμῖν. 4. καὶ γὰρ et® " ἐσταυρώθη ἐξ ᾿' ἀσθενείας, ἀλλὰ ζῇ ἐκ 
ἃ Gal. νιον; δυνάμεως " Θεοῦ 1 - καὶ γὰρ καὶ ἡμεῖς " ἀσθενοῦμεν ἐν 1} αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ 


1 Thess. 
iii. 4. 
chap. ix. 8 only. 


e Chap. xii. 21 only. f Reff. i. 23. 


k x Cor. i. 23, ii. 2,8; Gal. iii. 1. 


g Reff. ii. 9. h Reff. xi. 21. 


: i Rom. xiv. 4; 
1 Reff. xi. 30. τῇ Reff. vi. 7. 


ἢ Reff. xi. 21. 


1 49cA 17, vg. prefix Sou to τριτον (from xii. 14). 
2 A and the Peshitto read (from xii. 14) eroupws exw ελθειν for ερχομαι. 


δ ἢ, g and the Syriac vss. prefix wa to em στ. 
49, δ vg. read ἡ tp. (as at Matt. xviii. 16, 1 Tim. v. 19) for καὶ tp. 


5 D*E add yap after wpoetp. 


ὁ D*, d, e and the Harclean om. ws before wapwv. 
7 DcEKLP and the Syriac have γραφω (from ver. 10); om. SABD*G 17 and the 


Latins. 


8 f, vg. have an for ewer, and there is Patristic testimony to a variant ew 
9 So NcADbcEL, f, vg. and the Syriac; better om. εἰ with *BD*GKP 17, d, e, 


g and the Bohairic. 
10 17 om. Oeov; so also Hilary. 


1 BDEKLP, d, e, vg. and the Harclean give ασθεν. ev avtw; better σὺν for ev 
with NAG, f, g, the Peshitto and Bohairic. 


Ver. 4. (a) καὶ yap ἐσταυρώθη k.7.A. : 
for He was crucified through weakness 
(cf. Phil. ii. 8, 1 Pet, iii, 18; ἐκ indicating 
that it was His self-assumed ἀσθένεια 
which made the Passion possible), but 
liveth through (ἐκ again indicating the 
ultimate condition) the Power of God 
(see reff. and cf. Rom. viii. 11, Eph. i. 
20, Phil. ii. 9).—(d) καὶ yap ἡμεῖς κ-.τ.λ.: 
for we also are weak with Him (the read- 
ing ἐν αὐτῷ might be explained from 
such passages as i. 5, iv. 10, 11; but it 
is so startling that we hesitate to adopt 
it, when the MS. evidence is so evenly 
balanced; σὺν αὐτῷ means simply “ we 
are weak, as He was weak, in the world’s 
eyes”; see xii. 10), but we shall live 
with Him, not only in the Resurrection 
Life of believers (John xiv. 19, Rom. v. 
10, vi. 8), but through the Power of 
God toward you, t.e., through the power- 
ful sanctions with which He will con- 
firm our exercise of Apostolic discipline 
at Corinth (cf. 1 Cor. v. 5). The thought 
is that already expressed in xii. 10. He 
now resumes the argument of ver. 3a, sc., 
you are claiming to test my claims: you 
should look to yourselves ; your faith is 


a witness to mine—that Christ dwells in 
you is a proof that He dwells in me, who 
preached Him to you. Cf. chap. i. 24, 
lll. 2. 

Ver. 5. ἑαυτοὺς πειράζετε κ.τ.λ. : try 
your own selves (πειράζειν generally has 
a sinister sense in the N.T. = “to 
tempt,” as at τ Cor. vii. 5, x. 9, Gal. vi. 
1, 1 Thess. iii. 5; but see reff.) whether 
ye be in the Faith, sc., the objective 
Christian Creed (cf. 1 Cor. xvi. 13) ; prove 
your own selves (δοκιμάζειν goes back to 
δοκιμή of ver. 3; cf. also ἀδόκιμοι at the 
end of this verse). Or know ye not as to 
your own selves that Fesus Christ is in 
you? (cf. Rom. viii. το, Gal. iv. 19) un- 
less indeed, sc., which is certainly not the 
case (for et μή τι cf. Luke ix. 13, 1 Cor. 
vii. 5) ye are reprobate. ἀδόκιμος is that 
which will not satisfy a test, and so = 
reprobus. Their own consciousness of 
the power of Christ’s grace is the best 
proof that his preaching to them was 
Divinely authorised; he ‘* begat them in 
Christ Jesus” (1 Cor. iv. 1 5). 

Ver. 6. ἐλπίζω δὲ κιτιλ. : but, how- 
ever it may be with you, J hope that ye 
shall know that we are not reprobate, that 











I—9. 


Lnodpeba! σὺν 3 αὐτῷ éx® "δυνάμεως ™ Θεοῦ εἰς “ ὑμᾶς. 
"πειράζετε εἰ ἐστὲ ἐν τῇ πίστει, ἑαυτοὺς ὅ " δοκιμάζετε. 
4 ἐπιγινώσκετε ἑαυτοὺς, ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς 7 Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν ἐστιν; εἰ μή 


τι ᾿ ἀδόκιμοί ἐστε. 
ἀδόκιμοι. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


7. "εὔχομαι ἢ δὲ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν, μὴ ποιῆσαι ὑμᾶς κακὸν 


[17 


5. ἑαυτοὺς ο Rev. ii. 2 


iii. 10; Ps, 
ἢ 6 οὐκ XV. 2. 


p Reff, viii. 
8. 
q Reff. i. 13. 


6. ἐλπίζω δὲ ὅτι γνώσεσθε ὅτι ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἐσμὲν τ Rom. i. 28; 


1 Cor. ix. 
27;2 Tim. 
iii. 8; Tit, 


μηδὲν, οὐχ ἵνα ἡμεῖς "δόκιμοι φανῶμεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ὑμεῖς "7d " καλὸν ΠΝ 
ποιῆτε,}0 ἡμεῖς δὲ ὡς ἀδόκιμοι ὦμεν. 8. οὐ γὰρ δυνάμεθά τι κατὰ 3; 3 John 
τῆς ἀληθείας, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας. 9. χαίρομεν 11 γὰρ 15 Sravt Ref, x. 18. 


u Rom. vii. 


ἡμεῖς " ἀσθενῶμεν, ὑμεῖς δὲ δυνατοὶ ἦτε τοῦτο δὲ 15 καὶ εὐχόμεθα, 21; Gal. 


1 Thess. v.21; Απιοβ ν. 14. ν Ref. xi. 29. 


1 DcEKL support ζησομεθα ; G has ζησωμεν ; better ἕησομεν with NABD* 17. 
2 Ὁ" 17, d, e, g give ζησ. ev avrw (a reading which may be the true one). 


3 6, g om. ex Suvap. Θεου ; K om. Θεου. 


4 BDcE om. εἰς vpas, wherefore W.H. bracket the words, 


5 A om. eavrovs Soxipal. 


5 δ" om. 4. 


7 BDEKL, d, e and the Syriac support the order "Ino. Xp.; SSAGP, ἢ, g, vg. and 


the Bohairic give Xp. *Iyno. 


8 BD* 17 om. ἐστιν after ev υμιν; but it is found in all the remaining uncials and 


in the primary vss. 


9 DcEKL and the Peshitto support evxopa:; better εὐχομεθα with SHABD*GP 
17, 37, the Latin, Harclean and Bohairic vss. 


1 ΚΙ, have ποιεῖτε for wounre. 


12 DcE**K om, yap; the Peshitto has δε. 


1 DEP, f give χαιρωμεν. 


18 sscDcEKL and the Peshitto give δὲ καὶ; better om. δὲ with 49*ABD*GP, the 


Latin and Bohairic vss. 


we can confidently submit to any testing 
of our apostolic authority. 

Ver. 7. εὐχόμεθα δὲ κ-.τ.λ. : now we 
pray to God (for εὐχ. πρὸς cf. Num. xi. 


_ 2) that ye do no evil; not that ye may 


_ appear approved, i.e., the motive of his 
ea was not that his ministry should 
e accredited by its success, but that ye 
_ may do that which is honourable (see reff. 
and mark the contrast between τὸ κακόν 

and τὸ καλόν), even though we be as repro- 
bate. That is, his prayer was for their 
Sakes, and it was sincerely offered 
_ although, if it were fully answered, there 
would be no occasion for the exercise of 
his apostolic authority, and so the δοκιμή 
or “ proof’ which the malcontents were 
asking for (ver. 3) would not be mani- 
fested. And he gives two reasons for 
this disinterestedness of his intercessions 
for them: (i.) he could not exercise his 
authority, even if he would, except in con- 
formity with the facts (ver. 8), and (ii.) 
their moral growth is a real joy to him 
(ver. 9). 

Ver. 8. οὐ yap δυνάμ. «.7.A.: for we 


can do nothing, exhibit no Apostolic 
power, against the truth, t.e., against the 
facts of the case, but for the truth (cf. 
1: Cor. iii. 1 for the elliptical constr.). The 
principle here laid down is of far wide: 
application than an accurate exegesis can 
assign to it in its context. It is a general 
principle, which Christian theology has 
not always sufficiently remembered, that 
to fight against truth, whether ethical or 
historical or scientific, is to fight against 
Him who is the Truth, and so is to court 
defeat. We can do nothing, even if we 
would, against the truth cf 1 Esdr. iv. 
38). 

Ver. 9. χαίρομεν yap «.7.A.: for we 
rejoice when we are weak and ye are 
strong, 4.¢., in Christian graces. The 
primary reference is to that weakness 
which the non-exercise of Apostolic 
authority would seem to suggest to them 
(ver. 4, xi. 21), and of which his opponents 
were very ready to accuse him (x. το) 
but in all weakness of his he repeatedly 
declares his contentment, if it minister in — 
any way to their edification (see iv. 12, 


only; ¢f. τὴν ὑμῶν * κατάρτισιν. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


XIII. 


10. διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα ἀπὼν γράφω, ἵνα 


Eph. iv. παρὼν ph " ἀποτόμως χρήσωμαι 2 κατὰ τὴν " ἐξουσίαν ἣν ἔδωκέ ὃ 


12; 1 


These. iii. μοι ὁ Κύριος εἰς 7 οἰκοδομὴν, καὶ οὐκ εἰς 7 καθαίρεσιν. 


x Tit. i. 13 


II. ΓΛοιπὸν, ἀδελφοὶ, χαίρετε, "καταρτίζεσθε, παρακαλεῖσθε, " τὸ “ 


Wisd. ν. ν αὐτὸ > φρονεῖτε, " εἰρηνεύετε " καὶ ὁ “Θεὸς τῆς ἀγάπης καὶ “ εἰρήνης 


22 only. ϊ 5 
y Refi. x.8. ἔσται μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν. 
z Phil. iii. 1, 

iv. 8; 1 Thess. iv. 1. 

16, xv. §; Phil. ii. 2, iv. 2. 


12. *’Aomdoacbe ἀλλήλους ἐν " ἁγίῳ © * φιλήματι. 


a Rom. ix. 22; 1 Cor. i. 10; Gal. vi. 1; 1 Thess. iii. ro. 
c Mark ix. 50; Rom. xii. 18; 1 Thess. v. 13. 


b Rom. xii. 
d Rom. xv, 33 


e Rom. xvi. 16; 1 Cor. xvi. 20; 1 Thess. v. 27; cf. 1 Pet. v. 14. 


1 DEG and the Latins give μη παρων. 


2? DEGP have χρησομαι. 


5. KL and the Syriac support the order εδ. pot o Kup. (from x. 8); better o Kup. «5, 
μοι with SABDEGP, the Latin and Bohairic vss. 


4 A om. To avto φρονειτε.- 


5G 17, 73, g give τῆς etpnyys for τῆς ay. και erp»; DEL give τῆς erp. και τῆς 


ayamrns: 
6 AGL, f, g, vg. give ev φιλημ- ayro 


xii. το, and cf. 1 Cor. iv. 10).—rotro δὲ 
καὶ «.7.A.: this we also pray for (and not 
merely rejoice in), viz., your perfecting 
(cf. ver. 11). 

Ver. 10. διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα K.t.A. : for 
this cause I write these things, i.e., this 
letter, while absent that I may not when 
present (cf. ii. 3) deal sharply (we must 
understand ὑμῖν after χρήσωμαι, as at 
Esth. i. 19, ix. 27) according to the author- 
ity which the Lord gave me for building 
up and not for casting down. The last 
clause is repeated verbatim from x. 8. 

CONCLUSION.—VV. 11-13. FINAL ΕΧ- 
HORTATIONS, SALUTATIONS AND BENEDIC- 
TION.—Ver. 11. λοιπὸν, ἀδελφοὶ x.7.A. : 
finally, brethren (λουπόν strictly = “from 
henceforth,” but is used vaguely, as in 
reff. for “finally”. ‘‘ Well, then,” is its 
nearest equivalent as used in Modern 
Greek) rejoice (as at Phil iii. 1, iv. 4, 1 
Thess. v. 16 and everywhere in the Paul- 
ine Epp. where the word occurs; the 
rendering of the A.V. “ farewell’? cannot 
be justified. ‘Farewell’ would be 
ἔρρωσθε), be perfected (see reff. and ef. 
Lightfoot on 1 Thess. iii. 10), be com- 
forted, be of the same mind, live in peace, 
and then the God of Love (this phrase is 
only found here in N.T., but cf. 1 John 
iv. 8) and Peace shall be with you. In 
these exhortations we have a summary of 
the whole letter: (1) Rejoice in the grace 
you have received (i. 24, ii. 3) even as I 
do on your behalf (vii. 7, 9, 16, xiii. 9). 
(2) Be perfected, go on to perfection (vi. 
I, 13, Vii. I, 11, ix. 8, xii. 19, xiii. 9), the 
word καταρτίζεσθαι being used as at Gal. 
vi, 1 of gradual amendment after a grave 
fault. (3) Be comforted, the keynote of 


the early part of the Epistle (see on i. 4 
and cf. especially i. 4, 6, vii. 7). (4) Be 
of the same mind, live in peace (xii. 20). 
With the whole may be compared 1 Cor. 
i. 10, παρακαλῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς... ἵνα 
αὐτὸ λέγητε πάντες καὶ μὴ ἡ ἐν ὑμῖν 
σχίσματα, ἦτε δὲ κατηρτισμένοι ἐν τῷ 
αὐτῷ vot καὶ ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃ. 

Ver. 12. ἀσπάσασϑε ἀλλήλ. κ.τ.λ, : 
salute one another with a holy kiss. 
This common form of Eastern salutation 
became at an early date part of the ritual 
of.Christian worship, as indicating the 
brotherhood of the faithful in the family 
of God. So early as Justin (Afol., i., 65) 
we read of the “‘kiss of peace” in the 
service of the Eucharist.—domd{. tp. 
x.t.A.: all the saints, sc., all from Mace- 
donia where the Apostle was, salute you 
(cf. Phil. iv. 22). 
| Ver. 13. ἡ χάρις τοῦ κ. κιτιλ,: the 
Grace of the Lord Fesus Christ (his con- 
cluding salutation in Rom., 1 Cor., Gal., 
Phil., Philm., 1 and 2 Thess.), and the 
Love of God (see on v. 14), and the 
Fellowship of the Holy Spirit (as at Phil. 
ii, 1, and cf. 1 Cor. 1. 9, x. 16) be with 
you all, even with those who opposed 
him. The ordinary conclusion of a letter 
of the period was ἔρρωσθε, as χαίρειν 
was the introductory greeting (see on i. 
1). But St. Paul has a signature of his 
own, which he calls the σημεῖον ἐν πάσῃ 
ἐπιστολῇ (2 Thess. iii. 17); υὲξ., he 
always ends with a prayer that Christ’s 
grace may rest on his correspondents, 
either in the form ἡ χάρις τοῦ Kvp, “ly. 
Xp. or in the abbreviated form ἡ χάρις 
(as in Eph., Col. and the Pastoral 
Here, and here only, he fills it out so 





Ὶ 


Sent ποσὰ προ τ 





10—14 


ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς ot ᾿ἅγιοι πάντες. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ B 


119 


13. ‘H χάρις τοῦ Kupiou! Ἰησοῦ f Ref. 1. 


Χριστοῦ,2 καὶ ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος 


μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν. ᾿Αμήν.ὅ 


Πρὸς Κορινθίους δευτέρα ἐγράφη ἀπὸ φιλίππων τῆς Μακεδονίας, 


διὰ Τίτου καὶ Λουκᾶ. 


1 After Kuptov, some cursives, f, m, vg., the Peshitto and Bohairic add ἡμων. 


2 B om. Χριστον. 


δ haben ἃ, e, vg., the Syriac and Bohairic add ἀμὴν; better om. with Ὁ ΓΑ ΒΕ 


17, f, g, etc. 


as to embrace the Three Persons of the 
Blessed Trinity. Possibly the phrase the 
“ God of Love” in ver. 11 has suggested 
here mention of the “ Love of God,” i.e., 
the love which God has for man; and 
a prayer for the ‘‘ Fellowship of the Holy 
Spirit,” .¢., the κοινωνία which is the 
Spirit’s gift, is a fitting conclusion to a 
letter addressed to a community agitated 
by faction and strife and jealousy (xii. 
20). But whatever were the thoughts 
which suggested this triple benediction 
(cf. Num. vi. 23 f.), it remains, as Bengel 
says, “‘egregium de SS. Trinitate testi- 


-monium ”, It offers a devotional parallel 


to the Baptismal Formula (Matt. xxviii. 
19); and the order of its clauses receives 
its explanation in later words of St. Paul: 


δι᾿ αὐτοῦ ἔχομεν Thy προσαγωγὴν... 
ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύματι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα (Eph. 
ii. 18). It is the Grace of Christ which 
leads us towards the Love of God, and 
the Love of God when realised through 
the Spirit’s power promotes the love of 
man (x John iv. τὴ, the holy fellowship 
fostered by the indwelling Spirit. 

πρὸς Kop. x.t.A. This subscription is 
found (in substance) in KL, the Harclean 
and Bohairic vss. and in many cursives, 
but has no real authority. The mention 
of Titus and Luke is plainly derived from 
chap. viii. 18. A few cursives add the 
name of Barnabas; the Peshitto mentions 
Titus only. The form of subscription in 
the best MSS., NAB 17, is simply πρὸς 
Κορινθίους B. 


0 ++ 


"τ. 


wt 








THE EPISTLE OF PAUL 


TO THE 


GALATIANS 








INTRODUCTION. 


Text. The text of this Epistle has been constructed with due 
regard to the traditional text (Textus Receptus) on which our 
Authorised Version was based.. But the discovery of MSS. not 
then known, and the critical study of ancient authorities since 
that time, necessitate careful revision and extensive alteration of 
that text. For this purpose the editor has relied mainly on 
Tischendorf’s collation of MSS. The Apparatus Criticus is based 
on his authority and follows his notation. It contains all the MS. 
evidence which appears really important for determination of the 
text. The following letters are used to designate uncial MSS. :— 


δ Sinaiticus. F Augiensis. 

A Alexandrinus. G_ Boernerianus. 
B Vaticanus. H Coislinianus. 
C Ephraemi. K Mosquensis. 

D Claromontanus. [, Angelicus. 

E Sangermanensis. P Porfirianus. 


Corrections of ancient date, inserted in the uncial MSS., are 
indicated by small letters or numerals (a, c, 1, 3) attached to the 
capital letters. Cursive MSS. are denoted by the numerals 
generally accepted for their designation. 

The readings, punctuation, and division of paragraphs differ here 
‘and there from those adopted by Westcott and Hort. The reasons 
for these variations may be gathered from the notes. 

PauLineE AuTHoRSHIP. Widely different opinions are entertained 
by critics with regard to the date of the Epistle and the locality of 
the Galatian Churches. But its authorship has never been seriously 
questioned. This unanimity of tradition is probably due to the nature 
of its contents. For it is stamped throughout with characteristic 
features of the Pauline mind and spirit. Matter and style alike attest 
the personality of the Apostle to the Gentiles, It unites dialectic 
skill in criticising the language and history of the Old Testament, 


124 INTRODUCTION 


and a comprehensive philosophy which assigns to law, to the spirit, 
and to the flesh their several functions in God’s government of the 
world, with intense spirituality and absolute devotion to the Lord 
Jesus. The Apostle Paul alone of the Apostles and their con- 
temporaries exhibited this rare combination of mental and spiritual 
qualities. None of his Epistles is more certainly genuine, none 
gives so vivid a picture of his mind and character during the most 
active stage of his apostolic career. 

AnciENT Testimony. The adoption of its language by Fathers 
of the Church in the second century proves its antiquity and high 
reputation in their time. Polycarp borrows ἥτις ἐστὶ μήτηρ πάντων 
ἡμῶν from iv. 26, and θεὸς οὐ μυκτηρίζεται from vi. 7; Irenzeus gives 
a Latin version of iii. 19, referring to the Epistle by name; Justin 
Martyr reproduces Γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ, ὅτι κἀγὼ (ἤμην) ὡς ὑμεῖς from iv. 12, 
and ἔχθραι ἔρεις ζῆλος ἐριθεῖαι θῦμοι. .. καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις from 
ν. 20. Its canonicity is established by its insertion in every Canon 
of Scripture. Marcion also placed it at the head of his catalogue of 
Pauline Epistles. . 

ANTECEDENTS OF THE GALATIAN CoNnverRTS. Throughout the 
Epistle the author assumes the position of Founder, he addresses 
the Galatians as his own converts and claims special authority over 
them in the name of Christ who had made him Apostle and com- 
mitted to him the ministry of the Gospel among them. One passage 
in the Epistle brings into prominence the diverse elements which 
entered into their composition, reminding us that, like other Pauline 
Churches, they were mixed bodies comprehending a minority of 
Jewish Christians (iii, 28). But the circumcised minority are in 
general ignored (iv. 8), for the Epistle is specially addressed to 
the Greek converts, who had not yet accepted circumcision, but 
had of late been urged by agitators to submit to it for the sake 
of the covenanted blessings attached to it at its institution. 
These uncircumcised Greeks formed apparently the mass of the 
Galatian Churches: there is at the same time no doubt that they 
had been for some time regular attendants on the teaching of the 
synagogue, for the Epistle assumes throughout their familiarity 
with the- patriarchal history, the Law, the Psalms and Prophets, 
as well as expositions of Scriptural topics by Jewish teachers. They 
had belonged, in fact, to the body of devout Gentiles who frequented 
Jewish synagogues, studied Jewish Scriptures, and found many points 
of sympathy with their theology and morality, but repudiated their 
ceremonial law, and so formed a distinct class apart from the Jewish 
congregation 








a Se a 


ae 


INTRODUCTION 125 


Locatity oF THE GALATIAN CHuRCHES. The locality of these 
Churches demands attentive consideration, for on the determina- 
tion of this depends not only the date of the Epistle, but the whole 
of its historical connection with the life of Paul. The theory that 
these Churches were situated amidst the Keltic population in the 
north-east of Asia Minor, though it wraps much of their early 
history in darkness, requires us to assume that they were founded 
during the missionary journey of Paul and Silas across Asia 
Minor and revisited by Paul three years later: otherwise it could 
not be reconciled with the narrative of the Acts. The reaction 
therefore towards Judaism, which evoked the Epistle, cannot be 
dated before the commencement of his Ephesian ministry. Now 
before that time Paul had openly broken with the synagogue at 
Corinth and established Churches in Achaia practically independent 
of Judaism. Is it reasonable to conclude that a Pharisaic reaction 
in some of the Pauline Churches was then for the first time started 
with success and excited in his mind the lively apprehension which 
is here expressed? In my judgment the history of Greek Christianity 
precludes it, for a very real and formidable agitation on this very 
subject had once already run its course, and been so decisively 
checked in Syria and Palestine after the success of Paul and Bar- 
nabas in Southern Galatia as to render its renewal quite hopeless. 
A demand was made at Antioch by a Pharisaic party for the 
circumcision of all Christians, the authority of Paul and Barnabas 
was openly challenged, and the peace of the Church was endangered 
by conflicting views. But the decisive condemnation of this agitation 
at Jerusalem led to its speedy collapse; there is no trace, outside 
this Epistle, of its subsequent revival in any Greek Church. On the 
contrary the career of Paul within the next two or three years 
irrevocably established the independence of Greek Christianity ; 
hence I conclude that the two intrigues of the Pharisaic party, 
first at Antioch, next in the Galatian Churches, recorded in this 
Epistle were but a later stage of the movement recorded in the 
Acts—last expiring efforts of Judaism to arrest the growing freedom 
of Greek converts. 

But putting aside for the present the question of date, is there 
ground for supposing that these Churches were planted in the cities 
of Northern Galatia, Ancyra Pessinus and Tavium, as the late 
Bishop Lightfoot persistently contended, rather than in those of 
Southern Galatia, the Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe, 
as Professor Ramsay maintains? Great weight is deservedly attached 
to the opinion of Bishop Lightfoot ; but it must be remembered that 


126 INTRODUCTION 


it was formed more than a generation ago, when comparatively 
little was known of the internal geography of Asia Minor, or of its 
condition under the Czsars: whereas Professor Ramsay’s advocacy 
of the opposite view is founded on intimate acquaintance with the 
geography and history of the country during the first century. Again, 
Paul’s foundation of the four southern Churches and subsequent 
visits to them are well-attested facts, while he is not known to have 
visited the northern division at all. It had indeed little attraction 
for an educated Greek as a sphere of missionary enterprise, and 
held out little promise of success, for it was then inhabited mainly 
by an imperfectly civilised population of Keltic herdsmen and shep- 
herds. If the authenticity of the Acts be admitted, the earliest 
occasion on which Paul was within reach of Northern Galatia, and 
can have founded Churches there, was on his way to Troas and 
Macedonia. It has accordingly been suggested that he may then 
have turned aside to preach amidst that people. But every stage 
of that journey was accomplished under the immediate guidance 
of the Spirit, and the silence of the narrative, written as it was 
by a fellow-Christian who accompanied the apostolic party from 
Troas onwards, is conclusive against that theory. That history 
leaves the reader virtually no choice but to identify the Galatian 
Churches with the four whose foundation it records. It is futile 
to object that the instability which the Epistle reproves in the 
Galatians was characteristic of a Keltic people, for it belonged as 
certainly to the populace of the southern cities, or that there may 
have been Jews and Greeks in the northern cities when history 
establishes the special preponderance of these elements in the 
southern. The further contention that the name Galatia was not 
extended to the southern division of the province save in official 
language ignores the fact that the province had been seventy-five 
years in existence and really furnished the only collective name for 
the heterogeneous races incorporated in it under the previous rule 
of Galatian kings. If it be urged again that Paul would not have 
designated his Churches by the name of the province, the answer 
is that throughout his Epistles he invariably groups his Churches 
according to provinces, whether Syria or Asia, Macedonia or Achaia. 
His reference in this Epistle to the Churches of Judza and to his 
ministry in Cilicia can hardly be reckoned an exception, for these 
were quasi-provinces governed independently by imperial procurators. 
Nor was this practice a mere accident of language: it faithfully 
reflected his deliberate policy of Church extension, suggested 
perhaps by the example of the Jewish Dispersion, who had before 








INTRODUCTION 127 


planted their synagogues in the principal centres of commerce and 
civilisation. It was certainly his practice to establish groups of 
Churches round the several capitals of provinces, and link those 
centres together by chains of Churches along the main roads, 
and so to create an ecclesiastical organisation closely corresponding 
to the existing divisions of the Empire. We find for instance that 
he made the provincial capitals Antioch, Corinth and Ephesus 
successive centres of Church life as they were of imperial adminis- 
tration, and surrounded each with its group of dependent Churches. 
But for Jewish malice he might have done the same for Thessalonica; 
and his eager aspiration to visit Rome reveals still wider projects 
for multiplying these federations of Churches until they became 
coextensive with the Empire. 

Hence | conclude that in this Epistle also the name Galatia 
denotes the province, as it clearly does in 1 Peter i. 1, and that the 
Galatian Churches were those in its southern portion whose founda- 
tion is recorded in the Acts. This conclusion is confirmed by the 
leading part assigned to the Galatian Churches in the collection for 
the Saints (1 Cor, xvi. 1). It is further supported by the previous 
course of Galatian history. 

GauaTiAN History. The Greek name Galatia denoted originally, 
like the Roman Gallia, the country of the Gauls or Kelts (Γαλάται). 
About sB.c. 278 a considerable detachment of warriors, roughly 
estimated at 20,000, broke off from three of the Keltic tribes that 
poured down on Greece, and made their way across into Asia 
Minor with wives and children. As war was their trade and 
only means of subsistence, they scoured the country far and wide, 
sometimes plundering on their own account, sometimes allying 
themselves with various kings and cities, or taking service under 
them as mercenary soldiers. Eventually they formed permanent 
encampments under native chieftains in the north-east of Phrygia, 
south of Bithynia and Pontus, speaking their own language and 
dwelling apart from the older Phrygian inhabitants. This district 
became consequently known as Galatia: its broad stretches of up- 
land afforded pasture for their flocks and herds, and their families 
found safe homes in their cantonments. But the limits of their 
territory were still unsettled, depending continually on the fortune 
of war: for the tribesmen retained their predatory habits and were 
hardly ever at peace with all their neighbours. At last, however, 
in B.c. 189 they were forced by a crushing defeat which they en- 
countered at the hands of the Romans to respect the peace of their 
neighvours, and began to cultivate home industries within their own 


128 INTRODUCTION 


borders. Gradually they mingled more freely than at first with the 
Phrygian population, adopted their religion, though they retained 
their own language, and dwelt among them as a dominant race, so 
that Northern Galatia became the home of a settled people. 

But a century later the Mithridatic wars swept to and fro across 
their country, obliterating the old landmarks and opening a new 
chapter in Galatian history. Many of their chieftains distinguished 
themselves on the Roman side, and were rewarded with large grants 
of territory outside the old borders: one in particular, Deiotarus, 
became by the favour of Pompey the most powerful monarch in 
Asia Minor. He and his successors were enabled by the active 
part which they took in the ensuing civil wars of Rome, or by 
judicious desertion of the losing cause, to enlarge and consolidate 
their kingdom until it embraced Southern Phrygia with parts of 
Lycaonia and Pisidia, and extended to the range of Taurus. This 
was the kingdom which the last native ruler Amyntas bequeathed to 
the Romans at his death in B.c. 25. A Roman province was formed 
out of it, and retained the name Galatia which had belonged to it 
under its Galatian king, There is nothing in this history of gradual 
expansion to justify the arbitrary restriction of the name to the 
northern division alone. 

Still less reasonable does this appear in the light of its subsequent 
history. For seventy-five years before this Epistle was written 
Galatia had formed a single province of the Empire. Now the unity 
of an imperial province was not merely official, but affected all the 
relations of life. A system of centralised despotism prevailed under 
the Czsars which concentrated all authority—military, civil, judicial 
alike—in the hands of the governor; commercial and financial 
matters were regulated by him; his court was the centre of social 
life. The name Galatia therefore in the N.T. can only mean the 
great central province of Asia Minor which bore that name. 

But in the middle of the first century there was a wide difference 
in language, occupation, nationality, social organisation, between 
the northern and southern portions of the province. The northern 
was still mainly Keltic and pastoral with. comparatively little com- 
merce-and few roads. Southern Galatia, on the contrary, was full 
of flourishing cities, and enriched by the constant flow of commerce 
across it. This was the natural result of its geographical position 
and political history. In ancient times it formed the highway along 
which the Asiatic monarchs of the interior maintained their com- 
munication with the western coast. When Greek monarchs ruled 
in Syria and Asia Minor, the high-road between their two capitals 


-Ὡ νι δ δυϑο ὦ νι... “-" 








INTRODUCTION 129 


Antioch and Ephesus passed through it and it became a principal | 
channel for the flow of Greek commerce and civilisation eastwards. 
They were careful accordingly to plant and foster colonies of Greeks 
and Jews along the line of route. Hence came the mingled popula- 
tion of Greeks and Jews amidst whom Paul found so congenial a 
soil for planting Christian Churches. Augustus Cesar in due time 
inherited the policy of the Syrian monarchs together with their 
dominions in Asia, planting fresh colonies in that region in order 
to secure the important high-road to the east for his legions and for 
the interchange of commerce. The citizens of these various colonies 
and municipalities had but one collective name—the name of the 
imperial province to which they belonged. So also the Galatian 
Christians, though for the most part of Greek or Jewish origin (as 
the tenor of previous history suggests), could hardly be addressed 
by any other name than that of Galatians. 

Joint Mission or Paut AND Barnasas. Throughout the early 
history of Greek Christianity no more important event is recorded 
than the conversion of Southern Galatia. The area of Christendom 
had not till then been extended beyond Syria, Roman Cilicia, and the 
island of Cyprus. The successful ministry of Paul and Barnabas in 


Galatia added a new province to the kingdom of Christ, drove a wedge 








deep into the heart of an idolatrous region, and established a valuable 


_ outpost for further advance into Asiatic and European Greece. And 
_ the special character impressed by the circumstances of that ministry 
a upon the new Churches gave additional importance to their founda- 
a tion beyond the material extension which it effected in the area of 


Christendom. There for the first time Paul made a direct appeal 


_ to his Gentile hearers against Jewish opposition, and met with an 
yy enthusiastic response. These Churches started in consequence with 
| ~ an overwhelming majority of Gentile converts. In them for the first 
: time the Jewish Christians, who had hitherto held an undisputed 
Ἷ ‘initiative in the Church, found themselves in a decisive minority. 
_ This altered relation of Greeks and Jews produced a crisis in the 
_ history of Greek Christianity, and in the apostolic career of Paul 
a himself. Ror the Greeks had previously occupied a subordinate 
position in the Church, and the Apostle to the Gentiles had played 


a secondary part in the ministry of the Gospel. When, however, 
he boldly denounced the Jewish people and their rulers in the 


ο΄ Galatian synagogue for the murder of Christ, proclaimed him the 
a light of the Gentiles, and overruled the claims of the Law in favour 
_ of purely spiritual doctrines of divine forgiveness and grace, of 
human faith and repentance, the Greeks recognised in Jesus the 


VOL. III. 9 


1410... INTRODUCTION 


Saviour of the whole world rather than the promised Messiah of 
the Hebrews, and rallied round the Apostle as the foremost champion 
of Greek freedom in Christ. It was the commencement of a veritable 
revolution. Hitherto Christianity had been regarded for the most 
part as a national religion, it was now perceived to be a world-wide 
revelation, and an irreconcilable antagonist to the narrow formal 
creed of the Jewish synagogue. Gentiles had indeed been admitted 
to the Church many years before, when Peter baptised Cornelius 
and his friends; and the assembled Church had then solemnly 
ratified his act. The right of believing Gentiles to Christian 
baptism had thenceforth become a fundamental law of the Church, 
sealed to them in perpetuity by a divine charter which none could 
gainsay. But the acceptance of this principle had wrought little 
visible effect upon the structure or government of the Church. 
No sudden influx of Gentile converts flooded the existing Churches; 
they only grew insensibly by continual adhesion of individual Gentiles 
or groups of Gentiles to older congregations of Jewish Christians, 
The process of conversion was too silent and gradual to exercise 
material influence over the prevailing spirit of the community or to 
remodel its ministry and organisation. Christian teachers retained 
in those early years the stamp of their Jewish training, partly 
because the Hebrew Scriptures continued to be the only written 
Canon of faith and practice (though they had learned to interpret 
them in a new spirit), but still more because the Apostles and older 
disciples had grown up to manhood before they had known Jesus, 
had accepted the Law for their rule of life, and drawn their inspira- 
tion from the writings of Hebrew prophets; they prided themselves 
on their descent from Abraham and the patriarchs, rested on God’s 
ancient covenants with Israel, and fixed their hopes on the future 
kingdom of the national Messiah, which had a deeper significance 
for them than for other Jews because their faith was concentrated 
on the person of a living Lord who had risen irom the dead and 
ascended into heaven. Again, the outward environment of the 
Church was no less Jewish than the spirit of its teaching, for the 
synagogue was still the only centre of public ministry open to 
Christian teachers. Thither the brethren resorted regularly for 
reading of the Scriptures, for united prayer and praise, and for 
religious instruction; there they delivered addresses to mixed con- 
gregations of Jews and Christians, basing their doctrine on the 
Jewish Canon. They claimed, in fact, to be a reformed branch of 
the ancient national Church, and were long regarded by the Greek 
world as a purely Jewish sect. 




















Be Es 


INTRODUCTION 121 


Accordingly, the conversion of the Gentiles made at first but slow 
progress; few came within touch of the Christian ministry but those 
who had already become regular attendants on the worship of the 
synagogue, the devout Gentiles who clustered round Jewish congre- 
gations in Greek cities. These were not proselytes, for they shrank 
from circumcision with all the ceremonial bondage and social ex- 
clusiveness which it entailed; but they had become familiar with 
the language, the history and the spirit of the Old Testament, and 
had accepted much of its theology and morality. They were pre- 
disposed by these antecedents to listen gladly to a Gospel which 
placed the love of God and man above ritual observance and 
taught the brotherhood of all mankind: and so embraced the faith 
in considerable numbers. But these Greeks had no rights whatever 
in the Jewish congregation; though their attendance was tolerated, 
if not encouraged, they were only admitted on sufferance. They 
were therefore at first content, after having occupied so subordinate 
a position in the synagogue; to fill a secondary place in the Church, 
and to acquiesce willingly in the leadership of Jewish Christians. 

These considerations account for the tardy growth of Gentile 
Christianity, which lingered for several years on the eastern coast 
of the Levant without an attempt to raise its voice in the Greek 
cities to the west.! Even in Antioch, afterwards the mother-city 
of Greek Christianity, the Greeks were slow to vindicate their 
independence of Judaism. The prompt response however of that 
Church to the call of the Spirit for special labourers in the Lord’s 
vineyard attested at last the growing strength of their spiritual life 
and their hopeful confidence in the future of the Kingdom. The 
diffusion of the faith had up to that time been due more to provi- 
dential circumstances than to spontaneous effort ; refugees had been 
driven by persecution to seek safety in distant cities, and had carried 
their faith with them in their flight. But the mission of Barnabas 
and Saul was a purely missionary enterprise despatched for the 
express purpose of extending the Gospel to the islands and coasts 
of the Mediterranean. The two Apostles were necessarily invested 
with wide discretion in regard to the conduct of their mission ; 


1Thirteen years elapsed between the conversion of Saul and the Apostolic 
Council. The baptism of Cornelius took place before Christian refugees from 
Jerusalem had settled in Czsarea or Philip had taken up his abode there; so that 
it coincided more or less closely with the beginning of this period, whereas the 
mission of Paul and Barnabas belongs to its latter years; for the special object of the 
Apostolic Council was to allay the heart-burnings aroused among Jewish Christians 


_ by its success, and to restore the peace of the Church. 


132 INTRODUCTION 


neither their route nor their methods could be fully determined in 
advance, for they depended on future openings that might present 
themselves, and were therefore in large measure left to their own 
judgment. But the direction in which it was launched gives a clear 
intimation of the desires and hopes that animated its authors; it 
turned its back on Palestine and the East, and set its face toward 
Asiatic Greece and the famous centres of Greek civilisation ; it was, 
in short, a message from a Greek Church to their Greek brethren in 
other lands. 

The condition of Western Asia at that time held out an exceptional 
promise of success to Christian Apostles. Thanks to the universal 
peace and settled order which the Czsars had established throughout 
the Empire, that region had attained a high pitch of industrial activity 
and commercial prosperity. In spite of the social corruption and 
luxurious vices which riches brought in their train, the consequent 
exuberance of life, social, intellectual and spiritual, afforded a favour- 
able opening for religious reform. The region had been in former 
centuries a frequent battlefield between Greek and Asiatic races, 
and still formed a border-land between eastern and western thought. 
But the religion which the people had inherited from ancient times 
was more Oriental than Greek, and its degraded type of sensuous 
worship could hardly satisfy the conscience even of a heathen 
community to which the influences of western civilisation had 
penetrated. Greek philosophy and Roman morality combined to 
create a nobler ideal of human duty and divine government than 
could be reconciled with the popular religion, so that all the better 
feelings of educated men and women were stirred into revolt against 
the debased superstition of the masses. 

The religious ferment produced by this collision was specially 
aggravated by the multiplication of Jewish colonies in the principal 


cities of Asia Minor, systematically planted and fostered long ago — 


through the wise policy of Syrian kings for the encouragement of 
trade and promotion of intercourse between these two races of their 
subjects. These settlements were particularly thriving in Southern 
Galatia, along the direct line of communication between the two 
capitals Antioch and Ephesus. _ Nowhere else are recorded such 
conspicuous traces of their religious influence over the surrounding 
population. They formed, of course, distinct communities of their 
own, divided from the Greeks by unsociable habits as well as ritual 
obligations and religious scruples. Yet their Scriptural teaching 
proved so attractive to seekers after God that a considerable num- 
ber of Greeks frequented their weekly services in the Pisidian 


no ar Fe ΡΟ ἀν ΒΘ. τὴ ΜῈ 
Act a 


δος ὅς ἐς; 


al 


‘ 
j 
{ 
Η 
ἢ 
} 
} 
ἱ 
t 
Ἵ 
8 
ῃ 





INTRODUCTION 133 


Antioch and in Iconium, and these, like the devout Gentiles every- 
where, were disposed to give a cordial welcome to the preaching of 
Christ. Accordingly, it was in those cities that His Apostles gained 
their first conspicuous success; there Asia Minor first awoke to the 
call of the Gospel, and the first fruits were reaped of an abundant 
harvest. It was, perhaps, inevitable that this hearty reception of 
the new doctrine by Greeks should provoke intense jealousy on the 
part of the Jews, and arouse bitter opposition from them. The 
vehement appeal of Paul to his Gentile hearers at Antioch brought 
that opposition to a head, and stirred the passions of both parties 
to fever heat. The Jews heard the impotence of their law for 
salvation denounced in their own synagogue, the Gentiles heard the 
offer of a new way of salvation by repentance and faith in Christ 
alone. 

From that hour both alike recognised in that Apostle the fore- 
most champion of Gentile rights and the most formidable adversary 
of Judaism. ; 

Let us now, therefore, turn to his personal history and review 
the chain of circumstances which landed him with his colleague in 
the interior of Asia Minor. The record of the joint mission during 
its first few months was uneventful; they traversed Cyprus from 
end to end, preaching in all the synagogues by the way without 
achieving any success that the historian counted worthy of record. 
_ Barnabas, himself a native of the island, naturally took the lead 
δ᾽ in virtue of his older standing in the Church and of his superior 
position at Antioch as the chosen representative of the Twelve, but 
failed apparently to elicit any enthusiastic response. It was not till 


| Ὁ. they reached Paphos, the western port and the seat of the Roman 
government, that the spirit of Paul was stirred within him to carry 


his appeal to Gentile hearers. He procured by some means an 


᾿ ᾿ audience of the proconsul, and after a signal manifestation of his 


spiritual power in smiting Elymas with blindness, succeeded in con- 


* verting Sergius Paulus himself. This success was fruitful in results: 
' ἰξ established Paul’s virtual leadership; for Barnabas, though he 


retained the nominal dignity of head, was content to submit the 
_ further guidance of their policy to the more determined counsels of 
_ his energetic colleague. A new spirit of enterprise speedily mani- 


1 The historian chooses this occasion for dropping the Hebrew name Saul and 


Bd adopting the Greek name Paul, indicating that he then entered on his special 





ὸ ; Ministry to the Greeks. In telating the voyage from Paphos he ignores Barnabas 
_ altogether, and in the subsequent narrative assigns him throughout a secondary 
τς, part. The language of the Lycaonian populace furnishes an apt illustration of 


134 INTRODUCTION 


fested itself in their proceedings. Paul and his Company (as they 
are designated in Acts xiii. 13), crossing to the mainland, struck at 
once across Pamphylia and the Pisidian highlands into the interior. 
The desertion of John Mark at this critical moment is significant. 
He was warmly attached to his cousin Barnabas, and had under- 
taken the office of minister to the Apostles; yet so reluctant was 
he to embark with them on their new enterprise that he did not 
hesitate to incur a well-grounded charge of disloyalty by withdrawing 
from the mission immediately on touching the coast of Pamphylia, 
and leaving them to pursue their way without him to the Pisidian 
Antioch. This faint-hearted desertion serves by way of contrast to 
bring out in stronger relief the resolution with which the Apostles 
pressed forward from the coast. But on their arrival in Galatia 
their journey was arrested and came to an apparently premature 
termination. Ror many months they settled down permanently— 
first in Antioch, then in Iconium—with an absolute determination 
not to depart until they were either expelled by authority or driven 
to flight by imminent peril of life. Even then they did but take 
refuge in neighbouring cities for a while until the storm had passed, 
and eventually revisited the scenes of their former ministry, and so 
retraced their steps to the coast from which they had started, after 
firmly planting the faith of Christ in the region of Southern Galatia. 
The narrative does not explain this sudden arrest of the onward 
movement which had carried them with such determined energy 
into the interior, it simply records the fact that they stopped short 
in Antioch, without any intimation that a change had occurred in the 
apostolic policy. The reader might well gather from it the impres- 
sion that Galatia had been all along their destined sphere of labour, 
This, however, could hardly be: it can scarcely be conceived that 
they contemplated the cities of Galatia as their final objective when 
they started with such resolute purpose from Paphos; for those 
cities had neither ancient fame nor present importance to attract 
special attention. Nor, again, would Mark have found that brief 
expedition into the interior so alarming as to desert his post if he 
had known how short a distance they were about to travel. What 
then, were the subsequent circumstances that prompted Paul and 
Barnabas to abandon their more ambitious designs and take up their 
residence at Antioch? The history and character of Paul quite 


their mutual relations to each other: they recognised the superior dignity of Bar- 
nabas by identifying him with Jupiter, but called Paul Mercury because he was the 
chief speaker, 











INTRODUCTION 135 


forbid any suspicion that the change was owing to caprice or to 
irresolution on his part. Nor was it due to the immediate and 
unexpected success of their ministry in that city ; on the contrary, 
his recorded address in their synagogue furnishes ample evidence of 
his previous failure to touch the consciences or win the hearts of 
his Jewish hearers. He, doubtless, had begun his ministry there, as 
elsewhere, by offering the Gospel to the Jews, and his bitter denun- 
ciation of their prejudice against Christ shows how stubborn had 
been their resistance to his Gospel before he turned to his Gentile 
hearers with this despairing appeal. 

On the whole therefore I conclude from a survey of the historical 
narrative that Paul and Barnabas embarked at Paphos on an 
ambitious project of missionary enterprise, which for some unknown 
reason they failed to realise, though they pursued it steadily without 
a pause as far as Antioch. It further appears that their first efforts 
after their arrival in that city were foiled by the persistent opposition 
of the Jews, but that their perseverance was at last rewarded by 
signal success amongst the Greeks. 

It is time now to turn to the Epistle and compare these con- 
clusions with the incidental reference there made to the circum- 
stances of the conversion. In Gal. iv. 13 the Apostle reminds his 
converts that he had not originally preached the Gospel to them 
by his own deliberate choice, but on account of an illness which 
deprived him of all option in the matter. They knew (he writes) 
that his preaching had been due to infirmity of the flesh, 1.6., to 
bodily illness. This language plainly intimates that he altered his 
plans in consequence of the illness, and undertook their conver- 
sion instead of carrying out his previous intention. Neither the 
time nor the place of the attack are specified, but the context 
supplies materials for determining both. It shows that the Galatians 
were quite aware of his previous design, that they had been eye- 
witnesses of the illness, had watched its progress and seen enough of 
its repulsive symptoms to provoke natural contempt and disgust, but 
had on the contrary exhibited heartfelt sympathy and intense desire 
to alleviate his sufferings. It is quite certain therefore that it ran 
its course after his arrival in their country. It may have been 
contracted on the way; if it was (as his language in iv. 15 and 
vi. 11 suggests) an attack of virulent ophthalmia which permanently 
impaired his sight, it is probable that he caught the infection in the 
lowlands of Pamphylia, where that malady was notoriously prevalent. 
But whatever its specific character, it was in Galatia that it pros- 
trated him, and by incapacitating him for continuing his journey 


136 INTRODUCTION 


left him no choice but to prolong his stay in the country, and so 
occasioned the conversion of the Galatians as its eventual result. 
Evidently the illness beset him so soon after his arrival that he 
had no time before the attack either to resume his journey or to 
entertain any plan for preaching where he was. It was, however, 
so tedious and protracted in its operation that it altered his whole 
scheme of travel. And whereas he was but a passing stranger when 
he broke down, and had not attempted to make a single convert, 
he found himself before its close surrounded by a devoted band of 
friends who were zealous to make any sacrifice for his relief. The 
pathetic language of the Epistle shows how intimate an affection 
had grown up between the Apostle and his Galatian hosts, and 
makes it clear that the nucleus of a future Church was formed by 
the ministrations of his sick chamber. No mention is made of this 
illness in the Acts, for it belonged to the personal history of the 
Apostle rather than to the history of the Church; but the record 
dovetails with subtle harmony into the narrative of the Acts, ex- 
plaining at once why he stopped short at the first stage of his 
intended journey, and how it came to pass that so many of his 
hearers afterwards rallied round him with enthusiasm on his appear- 
ance in the synagogue of Antioch. 

A consideration of the geographical condition of Asia Mines in 
the middle of the first century brings out still more clearly the 
thorough agreement of the two narratives. The Epistle implies, 
as we have seen, that the foundation of the Galatian Churches 
was due to an interrupted transit through their country. Now this 
conception is fatal to the idea of a northern site for those Churches. 


What possible object could the Apostle have for visiting Northern - 


Galatia at all unless it was for the conversion of its people? It lay 
quite away from his recorded track, and it is inconceivable that he 
intended to traverse it on his way to some still more distant field of 
labour. Southern Galatia, on the contrary, was traversed from end 
to end by a great highway along which he is known to have travelled 
four times, visiting the cities through which it passed. According 
to the Acts the first of these cities visited by the Apostle was the 
Pisidian: Antioch in the extreme south of the Galatian province. 
There his journey was for some reason arrested, and there he 
succeeded after a prolonged sojourn in founding the first Galatian 
Church. These facts identify Antioch as the scene of his involun- 
tary detention, and its position gives at once a definite clue to the 
original purpose of the apostolic expedition from Paphos. It was 
a Roman colony planted by Augustus Cesar on the main road which 


TNT ETS Re, τι τον a rey ae 


. 
Π 
; 

rt 
rf 

i 
¥ 
᾿ 
᾿' 


Sree 








INTRODUCTION 137 


ran from Syria to the western coast of Asia and so linked the eastern 
provinces of the Empire with Greece and Rome by way of Ephesus. 
It was besides in direct communication with the southern coast of 
Pamphylia, and so with Cyprus; for a system of military roads, 
studded with colonies, converged upon it from the south. For full 
half the year this was the only regular means of communication 
between Paphos and the province of Asia; for even in autumn the 
persistency and violence of the Etesian winds out of the A2gean Sea 
made it difficult and dangerous for the best found vessels to round 
the Cnidian promontory, as was proved by Paul’s subsequent ex- 
perience. There is also good reason to caiculate that Paul and 
Barnabas, starting from Syria after the reopening of navigation in 
the spring, spent the summer in traversing Cyprus from end to end 
and did not arrive at Paphos before the autumn. Their only means 
of proceeding westward at that season was to cross to the mainland 
in such coasting craft as they could find at. Paphos and strike across 
Pamphylia to the main road at Antioch, as they did. This raises 
a presumption that their original object in making so eagerly for the 
Pisidian Antioch was to reach Ephesus and the province of Asia. 
On arriving at that city they had the option of three routes only: 
(1) to proceed northward by local roads into the heart of Phrygia, . 
which was obviously not their intention when they started from 
Paphos; (2) to move eastward to Iconium and other Galatian cities, 
but these are expressly excluded from his original purpose by the 
language of the Epistle in iv. 13; (3) to pursue their journey west- 
ward by the high-road to Ephesus. This was Paul’s project on his 
next visit to the Galatian Churches, and was doubtless his design on 
this occasion, had it not been hindered by illness, as it was afterwards 
by the voice of the Spirit. It was, in fact, ordained that the con- 
_version of the Galatians should form the first step to that of Asia 
Minor, and that Ephesus and the famous cities of the western sea- 
board should be reserved for the final consummation of his apostolic 
labours amid the Asiatic Greeks. The outcome of his public ministry 
with Barnabas in Southern Galatia is recorded in Acts xiii., xiv. His 
successful appeal to the conscience of his Greek hearers provoked 
intense jealousy on the part of the unconverted Jews, who proceeded 
to hunt the Apostles with determined malice from every city in suc- 
cession. They were enabled with the support of influential partisans 
at Antioch, by secret plots at Iconium, and by mob-violence at Lystra, 
to put the Apostles everywhere to flight, but not before they had 
planted in each place the seed of a future Church, which had become 
so firmly established before the final departure of Paul and Barnabas 


138 INTRODUCTION 


from the country that they were able to organise a permanent frame- 
work for the government of the several Churches. According to 
their own report of their mission, its most conspicuous feature had 
been the door of faith which God had opened to the Gentiles. The 
widespread alarm raised in the Churches of the Circumcision by the 
number and ritual independence of these Greek converts produced 
a crisis in the Church and threatened a dangerous schism between 
its Jewish and Greek sections. Christians from Judza raised a 
standard of open revolt against Paul and Barnabas at Antioch, dis- 
puting their right to concede this freedom to the Gentiles.. Thanks, 
however, to the intervention of the older Apostles these agitators 
were decisively condemned at Jerusalem, the apostolic authority of 
Paul and Barnabas was triumphantly vindicated, and the liberty of 
Gentile converts in the matter of circumcision was finally established, 
while the religious prejudices of Jewish Christians against com- 
munion with the unclean were mitigated by prudent concession to 
Jewish sentiment. 

Seconp Ministry oF Paut in Garatia, The apostolic con- 
ference at Jerusalem was followed by a gathering at the Syrian 
Antioch of Christians from Jerusalem. Besides Judas and Silas, 
who were deputed by the Church of Jerusalem to proceed to Antioch 
as their representatives, Peter himself repaired thither with Mark 
and others, whose influence so seriously undermined that of Paul in 
the mind of Barnabas that they agreed to separate. Paul accordingly 
enlisted Silas as his companion for a fresh mission to the cities of the 
Greeks. His first object was to revisit his Galatian converts and 
communicate to them the terms of union between Jewish and Gentile 
converts which had been ratified by the Churches at Jerusalem and 
Antioch. He hastened apparently to carry tidings of that decision in 
person, probably crossing the mountain-passes from Cilicia as early 
as they were open in the ensuing spring,! and to recommend its 
observance to his disciples. During this visit he also made choice 
of Timothy for his minister, and decided in consequence to circumcise 
him, lest the Jews should take offence in the cities he was about 
to visit. His visit was otherwise uneventful. He traversed the 
whole country, confirming the Churches everywhere, but only on his 
way to the new sphere which lay before him; and did not revisit 
Galatia till three years later on his way from Syria to Ephesus. 

Motive AND GENERAL SCHEME OF THE EPpisTLe. The opening 

11 appears from Cicero’s letters that at the time of his government of Cilicia 


these passes were absolutely closed during the winter months (Cic. ad Ait., v., 21), 
even for important despatches. 











INTRODUCTION 139 


verses of the Epistle throw a clear light on the motive which 
prompted it. In i. 1 he vindicates his own apostolic commission, in 
i. 6-9 the truth of his Gospel, against an attack which was troubling 
the peace of the Galatian Churches in his absence. The move- 
ment was not spontaneous, but due to an intrigue set on foot by 
foreign emissaries. Alarming tidings had, however, reached the 
Apostle as to the progress of the agitation. Its nature becomes 
apparent from the whole tenor of the Epistle ; it was an attempt 
of the Pharisaic party to revive Judaism within the Church. Fer 
this purpose it was necessary for its authors to impugn the truth 
of the Apostle’s doctrine, and they sought accordingly to undermine 
his personal influence and depreciate his apostolic authority. Some 
had even ventured to impeach the sincerity and the consistency of 
his teaching by accusing him of an inordinate desire to please (i. 10). 
He had perhaps given specious occasion for this charge by his avowed 
principle of becoming all things to all men, but he dismisses it lightly 
' with scorn, for the friends and converts to whom he was writing 
knew well that his real motive had always been to win men to 
Christ. He does not apparently feel it needful to defend his motives, 
but concentrates attention on two points, the truth of his Gospel, 
and the reality of his commission from God. He begins with an 
indignant denunciation of the new heresy, which he declares to be 
a spurious perversion of the one true Gospel. But he perceives 
the necessity for vindicating his own right to speak in the name 
of Christ before grappling with the main issue and developing the 
fundamental divergence of the Gospel in its essential basis and 
spirit from the Law. For the result of the conflict depended 
practically more on the personal than the doctrinal factor. He had 
been himself the foremost champion of Gentile freedom in Christ ; 
the doctrine of free grace in Him had won its way mainly through 
the advocacy of Paul and owed its triumph in Galatia, at Antioch, 
and in Jerusalem, to his eloquent support. This was why his 
antagonists had endeavoured to depreciate his position in the 
Church, and to set up the Twelve as the real interpreters of Christ 
on earth, that they might thereby discredit his authority as a 
teacher. The circumstances of his life furnished opponents with 
plausible ground for questioniiyg the soundness of his doctrine. He 
had neither listened to the voice, nor seen the face, of Christ on 
earth; he had not attended on His ministry like the Twelve, nor 
been sent forth like them by His express command. He was, in 
short, to use his own words, an Apostle born out of due time. 
This made it easy for them to contend that he had not received 


140 INTRODUCTION 


the Gospel by direct revelation from Christ, but gathered it at 
second-hand from the Twelve. To meet this insidious policy, he 
was forced to place on record the true history of his conversion and 
subsequent ministry in Christ. He relates accordingly God’s 
revelation to him of His Son from heaven, his secret communion 
with God apart from all human intercourse, his entire independence 
_ of the Twelve, the full recognition of his Apostleship to the Gentiles 
by the three pillars of the Church at Jerusalem, and his public 
rebuke to Peter at Antioch. Incidentally this autobiography is of 
the utmost historical value: while it is in perfect harmony with the 
outlines of the historical narrative, it adds to it a rich store of 
personal details, and reveals the inward motives and policy of the 
chief actors in successive scenes. It relates, however, only certain 
events which bore on the immediate object of the author, v7z., the 
vindication of his own position in the Church. 

The remainder of the Epistle (with the exception of a few personal 
appeals and practical exhortations) is devoted to a scrutiny of the 
divergent principles of the Law and the Gospel. The intruders, 
belonging manifestly to the Pharisaic party, had been urging the 
Greek converts in Galatia to embrace circumcision, not as an 
absolute necessity for salvation, but as a counsel of perfection 
which would invest them with superior holiness to their uncircum- 
cised brethren, would entitle them to a higher place in the Kingdom 
of God, and secure to them the covenanted blessings promised to 
the children of Abraham. By this arrogant pretension to superiority 
in the sight of God these Jewish Christians were in fact pouring 
dishonour on baptismal grace, reopening the quarrel between Jews 
and Gentiles and destroying the unity of Christ. The Apostle 
combats this delusive persuasion by setting forth the true function 
of the Law in the divine economy. It had proved in practice 
impotent to bless, for it stipulated for a perfect obedience to which 
flesh could not attain as a condition precedent to acceptance before 
God, so that Israelites had in fact fled to Christ for refuge from the 
curse of a broken law: it was primd facie inconsistent with the 
unconditional promise of God to Abraham, and the Mosaic dispen- 
sation was really an exceptional provision against the lusts of the 
fiesh, designed like the preparatory discipline of childhood to last 
only during years of immaturity before the advent of the true Seed 
of Abraham. He argues that the Law was a bondage imposed on 
the children of Abraham after the flesh, whereas Christians are the 
true seed of Abraham and heirs like Isaac of God’s ancient promises. 
By union with Christ in His death they have died to the condemna- 





ae 


fi 
ἢ 








INTRODUCTION 141 


tioz of the Law, by union with His life they have become partakers 
of His Spirit. They are therefore freed in Christ from the dominion 
of the Law unless they wilfully submit themselves to its yoke afresh 
by embracing circumcision. For the spirit within them stedfastly 
resists every sinful lust of the flesh, and brings forth of itself good 
fruit abundantly. 

Summary or Contents. The principal heads of the argument 
are as follows :— 


/ 

i, 1-5. Address, blessing, ascription of glory to God. 

i. 6-9. Rapid defection of the Galatians from their faith; denunciation of 
spurious Gospels, 

i. 10-ii, 14. Repudiation of corrupt motives; attestation of the author’s apos: 
tolic commission and of his independence of the Twelve and of human 
teaching; his championship of Gentile rights; and the recognition of his 
ministry to the Gentiles by the acknowledged pillars of the Church. 

ii. 15-21. Israelites had themselves confessed by seeking salvation in Christ 
through faith that no flesh can attain to the righteousness of the Law. Paul 
himself had died to Law with Christ that he might be quickened with Him 
to the new life of Christ within him. 

111, 1-14. Spiritual blindness of the Galatians. Was it faith or obedience to 

'Law that had procured for them the gifts of the Spirit? By faith men 
become children of Abraham and inherit his blessing. The Law entails 
a curse and not a blessing, but Christ has redeemed us all from the curse 
of the Law by bearing it Himself. 

iii, 15-iv. 7. The publication of the Law from Sinai could not annul or modify 
God’s earlier covenant with Abraham, It was merely a preparatory disci- 
pline like that of childhood and a temporary provision against the lusts of 
the flesh, ordained for children of the flesh till the world was ripe for the 
Advent of Christ the true seed. All that are His are one with Him, and so 
are the seed of promise: they have outgrown the restraints of spiritual . 
childhood and regained their birthright of freedom in the House of God. 

iv. 8-10, Protest against the revival of ignorant superstitions, 

iv. 11-20. Appeal to the remembrance of former affection. 

iv. 21-30. Illustration out of patriarchal history of the mutual relations between 
Jews and Christians. 

iv. 31-v. 12. Assertion of Christian freedom; protest against renewed bondage 
by circumcision ; threats of punishment against these devotees to the flesh, 

ν. 13-vi. το, Warning against the abuse of freedom; antagonism of the spirit 
to the flesh; its perfect harmony with Christ’s law of love and excellence 
of its fruits; practical exhortation. 

vi. 11-18. Peroration, and farewell blessing. 


Comparison oF GaraTians π. 1-10 wirn Acts xv. 1-29. In 
Gal. ii. 1-10 is recorded a conference of Paul and Barnabas with 
the Church of Jerusalem and its members. It appears from the 
narrative that they went up to Jerusalem for the express purpose 
of vindicating their right in virtue of their office as ministers of 


142 INTRODUCTION 


Christ to exempt Gentile converts from circumcision—a right which 
had been seriously disputed, but strenuously maintained by them. 
It further appears that James, Peter and John welcomed them as 
brethren in Christ, and fully recognised their special commission 
from God to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. In Acts xv. 1-29 is 
likewise recorded an open revolt at Antioch against the authority 
assumed by Paul and Barnabas to exempt Gentile converts from 
circumcision. They were forced in consequence to undertake a 
mission to Jerusalem for the vindication of Gentile freedom in 
Christ as well as their own apostolic authority, and to enter upon 
prolonged debates with the Apostles and elders there gathered. In 
the sequel the Church resolved, on the advice of Peter and James, 
to repudiate unreservedly the claim for universal circumcision in the 
Greek Churches, to condemn the agitators, and heartily to commend 
the services of Barnabas and Paul to the cause of the Gospel. The 
two records differ in details—it could not well be otherwise if they 
are really independent—but agree completely about the substantial 
facts. The same issue is raised in both, vzz., the right of Paul and 
Barnabas to dispense with the obligation of circumcision, the same 
Apostles take part in the conference. It is true that the presence 
of John is not noted in the Acts, but the speakers only are there 
named, and John probably did not speak, but stood silently beside 
Peter as in earlier days, while Peter spoke for both; the result of 
the proceedings is the same according to both records. Now, this 
result was of such vital importance that it decided for all time the 
relation of Christianity to Judaism, declaring it to be world-wide in 
its scope, and distinguishing it from the national creed of the Jewish 
people. As the sanction given by the Circumcision to Peter’s 
baptism of Cornelius had before stamped their approval on the 
admission of the uncircumcised to baptism beyond recall, so the 
Apostolic Council decided finally the union of all the members of 
Christ in a single Church: the concession once made at Jerusalem 
in the name of the assembled brethren was final. 

There were, in fact, but two occasions on which Paul and Bar- 
nabas went up together from Antioch to Jerusalem, and the object 
of both visits is specified. The earlier occurred in the lifetime of 
Herod Agrippa, and, therefore, not later than 44, before their 
successful mission to Cyprus and Asia Minor, whereas the Epistle 
records the recognition of their special ministry to the uncircum- 
cision in the fourteenth year after the conversion of Saul. Again, 
it was undertaken merely to carry alms with a view to an impending 
famine, and they found the Church of Jerusalem on their arrival in 








INTRODUCTION 143 


the utmost peril Herod was hunting down its leaders for death, 
and they were seeking safety in concealment or flight. Neither 
they nor Saul could show their faces without imminent danger, 
much less assemble to discuss the claims of the uncircumcised. 
The envoys could only depart in haste after depositing their alms 
in the hands of the elders. On the contrary, the account given in 
the Acts of their later visit to Jerusalem corresponds entirely (as we 
have seen) with the apostolic narrative. The historian, of course, 
reviews the event from the standpoint of Church history, while the 
Apostle presents the incidents in their personal aspect, and the 
details vary accordingly in the two narratives. For instance, the 
Epistle does not state that Paul and Barnabas were deputed by the 
Church of Antioch to represent them at Jerusalem, though we might 
well gather this from the circumstances and the history of their 
reception ; it does, on the other hand, record a revelation of the 
spirit, either to him or to the Church, which prompted the action 
of both, though for some reason unrecorded in the pages of the 
history. The statement of Paul, that he took with him a Greek 
disciple of his own, incidentally confirms the statement of the Acts 
that other Christians were deputed to accompany the Apostles. 
The account given in the Acts of a personal collision between the 
Apostles and certain agitators at Antioch, on the subject of circum- 
cision, explains the reference made in the Epistle to a demand for the 
circumcision of Titus, which Paul had steadfastly resisted. What- 
ever semblance has been found of divergence in the two accounts 
is really due to misconception of the language. Many critics have 
argued, for instance, as if the struggle over Titus took place at 
Jerusalem, but a careful student of the Greek text may perceive 
that it really occurred at Antioch before the mission, and is in 
perfect harmony with Acts xv. 1, 2. Again, James, Peter and 
John have been represented as at first lukewarm and hesitating in 
their support of Paul and Barnabas; but the Greek text places their 
brotherly cordiality in strong contrast with the prejudices and cold- 
ness of other Christians who had once been of high repute in the 
Church. 

The silence of the Epistle about the injunctions of the Council 
to abstain from ceremonial uncleanness is easily understood. They 
were indispensable for harmonious intercourse between Greeks and 
Jews in one communion; they were of real value until the Church 
was able to promulgate a new law of uncleanness based on true 
principles and distinguishing real from ceremonial pollution. Paul 
had therefore recommended their observance, and had, partly in 


144 INTRODUCTION 


consequence of this deference to the Mosaic law, been charged with 
preaching circumcision (v. 11). But the two questions were really 
distinct, and he is careful in this Epistle to confine himself to the 
subject of circumcision. 

HistoricaL CONNECTION OF THE EPISTLE WITH THE LIFE OF PAUL. 
The Galatian Epistle belongs obviously to the same group as the 
Thessalonian, Corinthian and Roman, but critics are by no means 
agreed as to its position amidst them in point of time, some placing 
it before, some between, some after, the others. All were written 
during the seven years in which Paul was engaged in founding and 
organising successive Churches on both sides of the A2gean Sea, there 
was considerable uniformity in the circumstances of his life through- 
out this period of apostolic activity, and this uniformity is reflected 
in a certain family likeness which runs through all the Epistles 
of that date. All except the Roman sprang out of the needs of 
infant Churches beneath his care. These depended largely on his 
personal example and authority for guidance in faith and morals; 
accordingly the personal element looms large in all, in none more 
so than in this. He was throughout in continual contact with 
Jewish influences, utilising the synagogue everywhere while it was 
possible for the conversion of devout Gentiles as well as Jews, and | 
everywhere encountering opposition and persecution from the Jews. 
There was, however, little occasion to combat Judaism in the 
Thessalonian Epistles, for that Church was at the time suffering 
grievously from Jewish persecution; in the Corinthian Church 
again the Greek element predominated, and the most pressing dangers 
arose from the contamination of heathen license and idolatry. 
Therefore the antagonism between Pharisaic Judaism and Christ- 
ianity comes into prominence in the Galatian and Roman Epistles 
alone. Both employ almost identical language in contrasting the 
Law and the Gospel, the former based entirely on the holiness of 
God and man’s duty of absolute obedience, the latter adding the 
revelation of God’s love even for sinners, and His offers of forgiveness 
and grace to all that believe in Christ. But the coincidence is not 
due to any similarity in the circumstances of the two communities, 
In the Galatian Church the Apostle was combating a survival of 
Judaism amidst his own converts, in the Roman Church he was 
laying down principles for a community who had hitherto had no 
Apostolic guidance. Still less can the identity of language be fairly 
urged to prove an approximation in the date of the two Epistles, 
For these fundamental truths formed without doubt the staple of 
the Apostle’s teaching throughout the years of continuous transition 








INTRODUCTION 145 


from Jewish to Christian doctrine, and his language in regard to 
them could not fail to become in some measure stereotyped. 

We tread on far safer ground when we rely on historical con- 
siderations for determining the occasion of the Epistle. During the 
seven years of continuous transition from Jewish to Christian doctrine 
a radical alteration was effected in the position of Greek Christianity 
and of Paul himself. At the beginning no Greek Churches existed 
outside Syria except those which he and Barnabas had founded: the 
two stood on the same level, and rival teachers had fair show of 
reason for ranking him below the Twelve; at its close a multitude 
of Churches in Europe and Asia recognised him as the great Apostle 
to the Gentiles, and he might have replied to his detractors with 
scorn by pointing to the visible tokens of divine blessing stamped on 
his apostolic labours in Macedonia, Achaia, and Asia. That he did 
not do so in his Galatian Epistle furnishes conclusive proof of its 
early date. When Paul, after his second visit to Galatia, departed 
for an indefinite time to an unknown destination in the west, there 
was still a reasonable chance of inducing many Galatian converts to 
submit to circumcision in his absence, but with every fresh Greek 
Church added to the communion the hope must have steadily faded. 
The growing strength, number, and independence of these Churches 
soon after made a revival of Judaism in one of them hopeless. But 
the attempt made at Antioch after the Council (as the Epistle 
records) to affix a stigma of uncleanness on the uncircumcised 
shows that the Pharisaic party, though defeated in their efforts to 
enforce circumcision on all members of Christ, had not then aban- 
doned the hope of persuading their Greek brethren to adopt it, and 
had little scruple about putting unfair pressure upon them for this 
object by withdrawing from their communion. Their partial success 
at Antioch in obtaining the adhesion of Peter and Barnabas to their 
practice encouraged them to hope much from fresh efforts in the 
absence of Paul. The moment was otherwise favourable for a 
renewed attempt to advocate circumcision in the Galatian Churches. 
Jewish influence was strong in the country; the people were im- 
pulsive and excitable, easily swept to and fro by capricious currents 


of religious emotion; the vacillation of Peter and Barnabas had 


made it easy to claim their sanction and set up the authority of 
the Twelve against that of Paul. He had himself during his recent 
visit furnished his adversaries with a fresh handle for misrepresenta- 
tion, for he had circumcised Timothy and had recommended his 
converts to abstain from the forms of ceremonial uncleanness most 


otfensive to the Jews, so that he was even said to be now preaching 


VOL, III. 10 


146 INTRODUCTION 


circumcision (v. 11). The imputation seems absurd in view of his 
later life, and would have been so after he had openly broken with 
the synagogue, but was plausible enough when he was bent above 
all things on promoting harmony between the two sections of the 
Church by some voluntary sacrifices of Greek freedom in Christ. 
I contend therefore that the recent warnings to which i. 9 refers 
(see notes on that v rse) were delivered on the occasion of his second 
visit to Galatia aft: r the Apostolic Council, that the agitation in the 
Galatian Churches was a sequel of the intrigue at Antioch, some of 
the Pharisaic ernissaries having probably followed the receding steps 
of the Apostle that they might renew their insidious schemes behind 
his back, and that the Epistle followed speedily on this agitation. 
Its language certainly implies a close connection between the two 
movements; for the remonstrance spoken at Antioch passes insensibly 
into the written argument without any clear line of division. If a 
laver date be assigned to the Epistle, the abrupt termination of the 
autobiography on the eve of the second visit becomes unintelligible. 
The earlier date explains also the motive which prompted him to 
record his personal collision with Peter. It is inconceivable that 
he raked up this story out of a distant past. But if the example 
and authority of Peter and Barnabas had been employed by his 
rivals in Galatia to undermine his position, it became necessary for 
him in his own defence to give a true version of the events that 
had occurred at Antioch. 

Assuming therefore that the reactionary movement in Galatia 
followed closely on his departure, where and when was the Epistle 
written? It may be presumed that he lost no time after he was 
informed of it before writing to counteract it; but the tidings could 
not reach him without considerable delay, for his destination was 
unknown until he himself opened communications from Philippi. 
Probably therefore he could receive no news from Galatia till after 
his arrival at Thessalonica; there was not however very frequent 
intercourse then between that city and Galatia, and his stay there 
was cut very short by persecution. The absence of Silas and Timothy 
at the time of writing points distinctly to the early days of his 
ministry at Corinth, for they were with him in Macedonia, but did 
not rejoin him afterwards till some weeks after his arrival in Corinth. 
That they were absent is morully certain. Their names, which 
appear conspicuously in the Epistles to the Thessalonians written 


about the same time, aie here absent in spite of Timothy's Galatian " 


home, and in i. 9 the writer expressly refers to the united warnings 
delivered by him and his colleagues Silas and Timothy, to fortify 














INTRODUCTION 147 


the appeal which he now makes in his own name (as we have fore- 
warned you of late, 1 say again). This date explains also the absence 
of any greeting from a Christian Church by name, for at the time 
the Apostle had only begun to gather round him the nucleus of the 
future Church of Corinth in the house of Aquila and Priscilla. 
I conclude therefore that the Epistle was written from Corinth 
before the arrival of Silas and Timothy, in which case it is the 
earliest Epistle of Paul now extant, being written before the Epistles 
to the Thessalonians. The previous outrage at Philippi and the 
subsequent persecutions which he encountered in Macedonia make 
the references to persecution and to the marks of Jesus branded on 
his body peculiarly appropriate. 

RESULT OF THE EPISTLE AND SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE 
Cuurcues. The Pharisaic reaction came upon Paul as an un- 
welcome surprise after the enthusiastic reception they had originally 
given to the doctrine of free grace in Christ, and the recent con- 
firmation of their faith by personal intercourse. He gives vent, 
accordingly, in forcible language to his indignation at the disloyal 
intrusion of false teachers into his own fold. Their readiness to listen 
with itching ears to strange doctrines, and to be fascinated by the 
charms of religious novelty, even though the doctrine was incompatible 
with the spirit and the cross of Christ, and in spite of attacks aimed 
at the position of their own well-proved Apostle, distressed him sorely; 
for they argued unsoundness in their faith, and shook his confidence 
in the permanence of their loyalty to Christ. But ought we, there- 
fore, to conclude that they were permanently estranged from their 
great Apostle? Are we to infer the depth and strength of the 
reaction from its suddenness? It seems to me that the balance of 
evidence in the Epistle inclines the other way and tends to suggest 
their substantial loyalty in spite of some temporary estrangement. 
For the agitation is declared to be but a little leaven, dangerous in 
principle and fraught with possibilities of evil, but only just beginning 
to work; no mention is made of Greek converts having actually 
adopted circumcision. Paul expresses his confidence that they will 
all be of one mind with him; he does not hesitate to threaten the 
intruders with the judgment of the Churches if they persist (v. 10) ; 
he longs indeed to come amongst them and assure himself by a fresh 
visit of their fidelity to Christ and His Apostles, but he lays down 
his pen with an assurance that henceforth no man will trouble him. 
And the evidence of history confirms this favourable impression ; it 
would seem that the Epistle did really succeed in re-establishing the 
faith of the Galatians. Ror we hear no more of any anxiety about 


148 INTRODUCTION 


their state; the Apostle was in no hurry to make his voice heard 
among them—he let three years pass before he revisited them, and 
then only on his way to Ephesus. Yet an incidental reference in 
1 Cor. xvi. 1 attests his confidence in their unshaken loyalty. It 
appears from that passage that when he appealed to all his Greek 
Churches for a joint contribution for the poor brethren in Jerusalem, 
the Galatians were the very first to receive his instructions, even 
before the Corinthians. It is a slight but sufficient testimony to 
the unbroken strength of the tie that bound them to their own 


Apostle. 


ee ee ee eee —— ει ΜΝ α- 





























τ 


CuapTer I.—Vv. 1-5. ΑΡοϑτουο Ap- 
_ DRESS, BENEDICTION AND DoxoLoGcy.— 
_ The Epistle opens with the author’s 
name and the designation of his office, 
_ Paul, an Apostle. So far it follows the 
regular practice of Apostolic Epistles in 
_ advancing at the outset a claim to atten- 
tive hearing. But circumstances gave in 
_ this case a special significance to this 
opening ; for in the Galatian Churches 
tival agitators had seriously challenged 
_ the author’s right to this title of Apostle, 
so that the bare mention of his office 
involved a distinct protest against the 
slanders which had been circulated in 
_tegard to his office and his person. He 
proceeds, accordingly, to an emphatic 
_ vindication of his divine commission, not 
_ from men, neither through man. He 
Taises here a twofold issue, evidently 
_ Corresponding to two specific points in 
his qualifications for the office, which his 
_ adversaries had on their side selected for 
attack. The transition from the plural 
in the first clause, to the singular in the 
_ Second, is significant, and helps to furnish 
_a key to the two particular points in his 
_ Career on which his enemies had fastened. 
His mission to the Gentiles had appar- 
ες ently been disparaged on the plea that ὃς 
had emanated from_men, i.e 
Church of Antioch onl Again the 

validity of his eS was impugned 
“on he ground e had originally re- 
Bees the Spirit through a man, 1.6., 
_ through the agency of shies. who had 










ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS.. 


I. 1, ΠΑΥΛΟΣ ἀπόστολος, (οὐκ ἀπ᾽ ἀνθρώπων, οὐδὲ δι᾿ ἀνθρώπου, 
ἀλλὰ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ Θεοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν 


1 SABDEFGK 17, etc, 


been deputed to lay his hands upon him 
at Damascus. By these insinuations an 
invidious comparison was instituted be- 
tween Paul and the originai Apostles 
who had been sent forth by Christ Him- 
self, and had received the Spirit by a 
miraculous outpouring from Heaven on 
the day of Pentecost. It was obviously 
impossible to confute these aspersions 
by alleging any specific act of the risen 
Lord. Accordingly Paul contents him- 
self for the moment with an indignant 
repudiation of the calumnies, reserving 
his full vindication for the historical re- 
view of his conversion and Christian life 
(i. 10-ii. 14). The tokens by which the 
risen Lord had attested His presence and 
His commission to His servant Paul had 
been very real and certain to the eye of 
faith; but they had, from the nature of 
the case, been less tangible than the 
evidence of His living voice and pre- 
sence during His earthly sojourn; they 
had been granted at successive stages of | 
the Apostle’s life, and had often taken the 
shape of visions, personal revelations, and 
spiritual communion. At his conversion 
he had been declared a chosen vessel 
for future ministry ; three years later the 
Lord had replied to his prayer in the 
temple, bidding him depart from Jeru- 
salem, for (He said) I will send thee far 
hence unto the Gentiles; afterwards, at 
Antioch, the Spirit had given command, 
Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the 
work whereunto I have called them; 


150 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS L. 


ἐκ νεκρῶν,) 2. καὶ ot σὺν ἐμοὶ πάντες ἀδελφοὶ, ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς 
Γαλατίας - 3. χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς, καὶ Κυρίου 
ἡμῶν 1 ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, 4. τοῦ δόντος ἑαυτὸν περὶ 2 τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν 
1 nnew BDEFGKL; placed after warpos ΑΡ 17. 
3 περι SADEFGKLP ; νπερ B 17, 67. 


thereupon God had visibly sealed his 
appointment by the abundant blessing 
bestowed upon his labours, as the Gala- 
tians themselves could amply testify.— 
διὰ. .. πατρὸς. The previous com- 
bination of ἀπό and διά in the negative 
clauses invites a corresponding combina- 
tion here in the antithesis, ἀλλὰ διὰ 
Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς, 
declaring, on the one hand, the instru- 
mentality of the Son in the appointment 
of His Apostle, and, on the other, tracing 
back the authority with which he was in- 
vested to God the Father as its original 
source. But Paul prefers here, instead 
of contemplating his apostleship to the 
Gentiles by itself as a single act of the 
Divine Head of the Church, to connect 
it with the larger design of building up 
the Church of Christ, for which the united 
action of the Father and the Son was 
indispensable. The Father set that de- 
sign in motion by raising Him from the 
dead, and is here accordingly associated 
with the Son as directly co-operating in 
the government of the Church. In the 
subsequent review of his own personal 
life, Paul in like manner perceives the 
immediate hand of God in his pre- 
Christian life, setting him apart from 
his mother’s womb, and training him 
under the law for his future work as 
an Apostle, before he was brought to 
Christ at all. 

Ver. 2. ot σὺν ἐμοὶ. No name is 
mentioned: neither Timothy nor Silas, 
nor any other companion of Paul known 
to the Galatians can have been with him 
when he wrote, nor is the name men- 
tioned of any Christian congregation ; 
probably he was residing in some Greek 
city in which no Church had yet been 
formed. The phrase of σὺν ἐμοὶ seems, 
from its use in Phil. iv. 21, to describe 
a small group of brethren immediately 
surrounding the Apostle; for the saluta- 
tion from them is there followed by a 
separate salutation from the Roman 
Church in general. The position of the 
Apostle during his first few weeks at 
Corinth, before Silas and Timothy re- 
joined him, corresponds closely to the 
circumstances indicated by this phrase 
(see Introd., pp. 146-147).---ἐκκλησίαις. 


There were four Churches in Southern 
Galatia, but they formed a single group, 
being all bound together by the great 
imperial highway that ran through them, 
and gave facility for constant intercourse. 
All would, therefore, respond speedily to 
any religious impulse, like the wave of 
Pharisaic reaction which the Apostle is 
combating in this Epistle. 

Ver. 3. The apostolic blessing is here 
as elsewhere summed up in the com- 

rehensive words grace and peace. These 
include the lifegiving power of the spirit 
as well as the assurance of God’s forgiving 
love in Christ and peace with an accusing 
conscience. This verse affirms once more 
the co-operation of the Father with the 
Son in devising and carrying out the 
scheme of man’s redemption. 

Ver. 4. περὶ τ. ἁμαρτιῶν. The sin 
offerings of the Law were designated 
περὶ ἁμαρτίας (cf. Heb. x. 6, 8), but 
περί and ὑπέρ were equally applicable 
with reference to Christ’s offering of 
Himself for our sins; the former fixing 
attention on the effect of His sacrifice 
in doing away sin, the latter on the 
motive which prompted Him, vis., love 
for sinners. ‘The two prepositions are 
combined in 1 Pet. iii. 18. It is often 
difficult to decide which is the genuine 
reading owing to the variation of MSS.: 
but here they are greatly in favour of 
περί, which is also more appropriate to 
the context: for in this clause a com- 
parison is intended between the sin- 
offerings of Christ and the typical sin- 
offerings of the Law; while the next 
expresses the motive of the Saviour by 
the addition ὅπως ἐξέληται . . .«--αἰῶνος. 
In early Greek this word denote the 
appointed lifetime of man, and so com- 
bined the thought ofan overruling destiny 
with the course of human life. From the 
conception of individual lifewas developed 
that of corporate life, whether of families, 
nations or societies, and the idea of 
divine appointment was more distinctly 
fastened on the word in Scripture,'so that 
every successive dispensation of God was 
designated as an αἰών. In this place 
αἰῶνος denotes the world which Jesus 
found existing at the time of His coming, 
out of which He chose His disciples. 





ee 
πὸ --- - -- στὸ ‘ ~~ 


4 
Ἷ 
Ι 
Ϊ 
᾿ 
ἱ 
Ϊ 


! 
\ J 








3 So eee 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


151 


ἡμῶν, ὅπως ἐξέληται ἡμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος aldvos! πονηροῦ, 5. 


κατὰ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ 
ἀμήν. 


3A ~ 5» 
αιἰωνὰας τῶν αἰώνων. 


καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν, 


τὰ 


ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς 


6. Θαυμάζω ὅτι οὕτω ταχέως μετατίθεσθε ἀπὸ τοῦ καλέσαντορ 


1 awwvos T. ev NAB 17, 39; *. εν. at. corr. DEFGHKLP, 


World is the nearest English equivalent 
to αἰών in this sense, if only it be under- 


‘stood to mean a particular phase of 


human society, as in the phrases religious 
world, scientific world, etc., and not the 
material universe.—éveot@Tos: existing. 
This participle is twice elsewhere applied 
to things song by way of contrast to 
things future (μέλλοντα), in Rom. viii. 38 
and 1 Cor. iii. 22. A similar contrast is 
here suggested between ὁ ἐνεστώς and 
ὃ μέλλων αἰών, i.c., between the world 
which Christ found existing on earth and 
the Messianic world whose coming 
Hebrew prophets had foretold.—rovn- 
pov. This sweeping condemnation of 
the existing world corresponds to the 
language of the Baptist and to Christ’s 
own denunciations of the evil generation 
to which He came. In spite of all that 
revelation and conscience had done to 
leaven it, He found the faithful few in 
number, and evil predominant in the 
mass.—éféAnrat. Here, as in Acts xxvi. 
17, this verb coupled with é« can only 
denote choice out of the world, not 
deliverance from it, which would require 
the addition of ἐκ χειρός, as in Acts 
xii. ΣΙ, or some equivalent. The clause 
describes the process of selection begun 
by Christ on earth, and still continued 
by the risen Christ as He calls fresh 
disciples into His Church continually. 
Ver. 5. ἡ δόξα, sc. ἐστιν. Our 
versions supply ἔστω and turn the clause 
accordingly into an invocation of praise. 
But the insertion of the article points 
rather to an affirmation, whose is the 
glory. The verb is usually omitted in 
the doxology, but ἐστιν is added in 
1 Pet. iv. τι. The glory consists in the 
manifestation of the Father’s character 
throughout all the ages in the continual 
redemption of mankind according to His 
will. Hereby is revealed His union of 
perfect wisdom, holiness, and love.—eis 
τ. αἰῶνας τ. αἰώνων. αἰών denotes in 
Scripture a divinely appointed period 
(see note on ver. 4). The larger of 
these divine dispensations comprehend 
within them other shorter periods, and 
are therefore designated αἰῶνες αἰώνων. 
The phrase in the text ascribes the glory 


to God for the whole term of these dispen- 
sations, 4.é., for all the ages of human life, 
since these together make up the sum of 
man’sexistence. The full form is used by 
the Apostle in Phil. iv. 20, 2 Tim. iv. 18, 
but he uses elsewhere the shorter form eis 
τ. αἰῶνας.--ἀμήν. This Amen crowns 
the previous declaration of the glory of 
God by an invitation to the Churches 
to join in the ascription of praise. 

Vv. 6-9. THE APOSTLE EXPRESSES 
SURPRISE AT THE SUDDEN DEFECTION OF 
HIS CONVERTS FROM THE ONLY TRUE 
GOSPEL, AND PRONOUNCES ANATHEMAS 
ON ALL PERVERTERS OF THE TRUTH.— 
Paul is evidently startled at the tidings 
of a sudden revolution in Galatian feel- 
ing. His intense indignation is evinced 
by the vehemence of his language and 
the solemnity of his anathema. There 
could be but one true Gospel; this new 
doctrine was no Gospel at all, but only a 
heretical perversion of the truth by foreign 
agitators. They were probably emis- 
saries of a Pharisaic party in the Church, 
which advocated circumcision and legal 
observances for all converts alike. 

Ver. 6. μετατίθεσθε: ye are removing 
(not removed as in A.V.). The agitators 
had not yet achieved any decisive suc- 
cess, though the Galatians were disposed 
to lend too ready an ear to their sugges- 
tions. It was not so much their actual 
progress, as the evidence afforded of the 
instability of the Galatian faith, that ex- 
cited misgivings in the mind of Paul 
(cf. iv. 11, 20); he regarded the move- 
ment as merely a little leaven, and had 
not lost his confidence in the personal 
loyalty of his converts and the general 
soundness of their faith (v. 9, 10, vi. 17. 
See Introd., p. 147).—rot καλέσαντος, sc. 
Θεοῦ. The Gospel call proceeded from 
God, like those to Abraham and the 
ancient servants and people of God; the 
Epistles of Paul invariably attribute it to 
Him (cf. i. 15), not to His human instru- 
ments.—év χάριτι. This is evidently not 
= εἰς τὴν χάριν (into the grace of Christ, 
A.V.), but records the spirit of Divine 
love which prompted the call. God, of 
His grace in Christ, sent forth the Gospel 
to the Galatians by the hands of Paul 


152 ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS Ι. 


ὑμᾶς ἐν χάριτι Χριστοῦ εἰς ἕτερον εὐαγγέλιον" 7. ὃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλο, 


εἰ μή τινές εἰσιν ot ταράσσοντες ὑμᾶς, καὶ θέλοντες μεταστρέψαι 


τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ. 


8. ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ 


οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίσηται ὑμῖν παρ᾽ ὃ εὐηγγελισάμεθα ὑμῖν, ἀνάθεμα 


ἔστω. 09. ὡς προειρήκαμεν καὶ ἄρτι, πάλιν λέγω, Εἴ τις ὑμᾶς 


εὐαγγελίζεται παρ᾽ ὃ παρελάβετε, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω. 


and Barnabas.—érepov. This passage 
brings out forcibly the different meaning 
of ἕτερος and ἄλλος. ἕτερος is primarily 
the other of two, ἄλλος another of several. 
Hence ἕτερος fixes attention on two ob- 
jects exclusively (cf. note on τὸν ἕτερον 
in vi. 4); here it marks the essential dif- 
ference between the true and the spurious 
Gospel, distinguishing the latter as quite 
a different Gospel. 

Ver. 7. ὃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλο. The trans- 
lation of this clause in A.V. and R.V. 
(which is not another) has caused great 
embarrassment by its apparent identifica- 
tion of the spurious Gospel with the true. 
Lightfoot pleads ingeniously that ἄλλο 
may mean another besides the true Gos- 
pel, and so interprets the clause to mean 
that it is no Gospel at all; but this will 
hardly be accepted by most other scholars. 
The American revisers suggest the ren- 
dering which is nothing else than. But 
these difficulties arise from making 8 the 
subject of the sentence: surely it is in 
fact a connecting adverb (touching which, 
as to which, whereas), as it is again in ii. 
ro, and probably in ii. 20. If the clause 
be rendered, whereas there is no other 
Gospel (t.e., than the true), the sense be- 
comes perfectly clear, and it forms an 
appropriate introduction to the succeed- 
ing anathemas by its emphatic testimony 
to the one true Gospel.—ei py}... This 
clause qualifies the former ‘there is no 
other Gospel,” only a spurious semblance 
(on the use of εἰ μή see note on ver. 10). 
—tivés. There is a studied vagueness 
in this and other references to the agita- 
tors. They were evidently not Galatian 
Christians, but strangers from abroad, 
whom the Apostle treats with real or 
affected contempt. 

Ver. 8. ἡμεῖς. Paul here associates 
with himself the colleagues Barnabas, 
Silas, Timothy, who had combined with 
him to preach the Gospel. He desires 
to impress on his disciples that the con- 
troversy is not between one teacher and 
another, but between truth and false- 
hood: no minister of Christ, not even an 
angel, can alter the truth in Christ.— 
ἀνάθεμα. The two derivatives, ἀνάθημα 
and ἀνάθεμα, are both employed in the 


LXX and N.T. in different senses. dava- 
θημα serves, as in other Greek authors, 
to denote a temple offering, statue, or 
ornament (cf. 2 Macc. ix. 16, Luke xxi. 
5), while ἀνάθεμα is restricted to the 
Hebrew conception of an offering devoted 
under a solemn vow to death or destruc- 
tion (Lev. xxvii. 28, Josh. vii. 1, Acts 
xxiii. 14). The Epistles of Paul attach 
to the word the idea of spiritual death. 
The significant addition ἀπὸ τοῦ Χρισ- 
τοῦ in Rom. ix. 3 associates with it the 
further idea of separation from Christ, 
and consequent loss of all Christian 
blessings and means of grace. It does 
not, like excommunication, pronounce a 
judicial sentence on particular convicted 
offenders, but solemnly affirms general 
laws of the spiritual kingdom, e.g., in 
1 Cor. xvi. 22, any who love not the Lord, 
here any who tamper with the truth of 
the Gospel, are pronounced outcasts from 


the faith, and dead to the Spirit of Christ. 


Ver. 9. προειρήκαμεν. The contrast 
between this plural and the singular 
λέγω proves that Paul is here referring, 
not to previous warnings of his own by 
letter, but to joint warnings given by his 
companions Silas and Timothy as well 
as himself during his visit to the Churches. 
He never speaks of himself in the plural 
number. @¢... ἄρτι: as we have also 
forewarned you of late, I say again. 
Our versions interpret προειρήκαμεν we 
have said before and καὶ ἄρτι πάλιν λέγω 
so say I now again. But Greek usage 
forbids this antithesis between προ. and 
ἄρτι. Mpodéyew means to forewarn, not 
to say in time past (cf. 2 Cor. xiii. 2, 
Gal. v. 21, 1 Thess. iii. 4); while ἄρτι 
is used indifferently of recent or of present 
time. In Matt. ix. 18, 1 Thess. iii. 6 
it means of late, in Matt. xxvi. 53, John 
xiii. 7, 37, xvi. 12, 31, 1 Cor. xiii. 12, 
xvi. 7 it means now, by way of contrast 
with the future. “Apre cannot therefore 
be used to contrast the present time 
with the immediate past. The words 
καὶ ἄρτι belong really to the preceding 
clause, and contain a reminder how 
recent had been the warnings which the 
Apostle is repeating. Since the rendering 
of John ix. 25 Whereas 1 was blind, now 


by 
2 
ἡ 
i 
i 
᾿ 
: 
i 
ἢ 
Ἵ 
᾿ 
4 
| 











™—13. 


ΠΡῸΣ TAAATAS 


153 


10. “Apri yap ἀνθρώπους πείθω ἢ τὸν Θεόν; ἢ ζητῶ ἀνθρώποις 
ἀρέσκειν ; εἰ Err! ἀνθρώποις ἤρεσκον, Χριστοῦ δοῦλος οὐκ ἂν ἤμην. 
II. Γνωρίζω δὲ 2 ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοὶ, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν ὑπ᾽ 
ἐμοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι κατὰ ἄνθρωπον " 12. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐγὼ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου 
παρέλαβον αὐτὸ, οὔτε 8 ἐδιδάχθην, ἀλλὰ δι᾽ ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ 


Χριστοῦ. 


13. Ἠκούσατε γὰρ τὴν ἐμὴν ἀναστροφήν ποτε ἐν τῷ 


Te. ετι SABD!FG 17, etc.; εἰ yap ετι DIEKLP. 
28 NAD°EKLP; yap $BD!FG 17. 
8 ovre before e818. BD9EKL; ουδὲ SAD! FGP 31, ete, 


I see appears to contradict this view of 
ἄρτι, it may be well to point out that 
ὧν does not mean whereas I was, but 
that the speaker’s real meaning was, I 
ne (sc., by nature) blind now see. 

The true rendering is of some historical 
importance, as evidence that warnings 
on the subject of circumcision had been 
given to the Galatians by Paul and his 
companions during a recent visit (see 
Introd., p. 146). 

Vv. 10-24. REPUDIATION OF CORRUPT 
MOTIVES. EVIDENCE FROM PAUL’S PER- 
SONAL HISTORY THAT HIS CONVERSION 
WAS DUE TO GOD, AND THAT HE WAS 
TAUGHT THE GOSPEL By GoD INDE- 
PENDENTLY OF THE TWELVE AND OF 
JERUSALEM.—Ver. ro. The order of 
words in the Greek text forbids the stress 
laid in our versions on the alternative 
men or God; the meaning of which is 
besides a little obscure in this connection. 
The true rendering of 4 is rather than 
(= μᾶλλον ἤ), as in Matt. xviii. 8, Luke 
XV. 7, xvii. 2, 1 Cor. xiv. 19: Am I now 
persuading men rather than God? This 
language indicates clearly what kind of 
calumnies had been circulated. His 
detractors accused him of sacrificing the 
truth of God for the sake of persuading 
men. It was, we know, his boast that 


he became all things to all men, but 


whereas his real motive was that he 
might win all to Christ, they insinuated 
that he was more bent on winning favour 
with men than on securing the approval 


_ofGod. During his recent visit he had 





ade two concessions to Jewish feeling; 


he had circumcised Timothy, and had 





recommended for adoption regulations 


tending to promote harmonious inter- 


course between Jewish and _ Gentile 
converts. It was easy to misrepresent 
these concessions as an abandonment of 
his former principles: and they furnished 
his enemies accordingly with a handle 
for decrying him as a time-server without 
fixed principles, now bent on winning 


Jewish favour, as he had been before on 
gaining the Gentiles (see Introd., p. 145, 
and of v. 11).—Aptit. The Greek text 
throws the emphasis on this word, and 
its subtle irony is brought out by the ἔτι 
which follows. ‘Am I doing this now ? 
Do you charge me now (he says in effect 
to these partisans of Judaism) with 
regarding men more than God? There 
was atime, before I knew Christ, when 
I did study to please men: if that were 
still my desire, I should not have been 
a servant of Christ.” 

Ver. 11. γνωρίζω. Here, as in r Cor, 


xii. 3, xv. 1, this verb has the force of 
reminding rather than of making known. 
In all three passages the author calls 
attention to forgotten truths, which had 
once been well known. 

Ver. 12. ἐγὼ. The personal pronoun 
is inserted, because the author is here 
laying stress on the special education he 
had received for his ministry of the Gospel. 
He had not learnt it, like his converts, 
from human teaching, but by direct 
communion with God in spirit, as the 
Twelve had learnt it from Christ’s own 
teaching. This independence of older 
Christians is a marked feature in the 
history of his life. The agency of Ananias 
was necessary for his admission into the 
Church, but after his baptism no older 
Christian appears on the scene at Damas- 
cus, 

Ver. 13. Ἠκούσατε. The Galatians 
had no doubt heard from Paul himself 
of his former persecution of the Church. 
How. it formed the topic of his 
addresses ish hearers may be 





αἱ jer in Acts xxil., and before 
Agrippa in Acts xxvi.—lov8aiop@. The 
rendering of this word in our versions, 
Fewish religion, is unfortunate: it im- 
plies a definite separation between the 
two religions which did not then exist, 
for Christians were still habitual wor- 
shippers in the synagogue; and it puts 


154 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS I. 


᾿Ιουδαΐσμῷ, ὅτι καθ᾽ ὑπερβολὴν ἐδίωκον τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, 
καὶ ἐπόρθουν αὐτήν: 14. καὶ προέκοπτον ἐν τῷ ᾿Ιουδαϊσμῷ ὑπὲρ 
πολλοὺς συνηλικιώτας ἐν τῷ γένει μου, περισσοτέρως ζηλωτὴς 


ὑπάρχων τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων. 


15. ὅτε δὲ εὐδόκησεν 


ὁ Θεὸς ὁ ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου, καὶ καλέσας διὰ τῆς 
χάριτος αὑτοῦ, 16. ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν υἱὸν αὑτοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ, ἵνα εὐαγγελί- 
ἴωμαι αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, εὐθέως οὐ προσανεθέμην σαρκὶ καὶ 


this view into the mouth of Paul, who 
steadfastly persisted in identifying the 
faith of Christ with the national religion. 
The word ᾿Ιουδαΐζειν denotes the adoption 
of Jewish habits, language, or policy (cf. ii. 
14). Sohere*lovdatopds denotes Jewish 
partisanship, and accurately describes the 


bitter party spirit which prompted Saul to 


take the lead in the martyrdom of Stephen | 
ΤΕΣ ministry: this view is justified by his 
irth at once a Hebrew 





and the persecution of the Church. 
dentally the partisanship was based on 
a false view of religion, for the narrow 
intolerance of the Scribes and Pharisees 
was a prevailing curse of Jewish society 
at.the time; but ᾿Ιουδαΐσμός expresses 
the party spirit, not the religion. Still 
more alien to the spirit of Paul is the 
language attributed to him in the next 
verse, I profited in the $ews’ religion 
(A.V.): for it indicates satisfaction at the 
success of his Jewish career, whereas he 
never ceased to regard it with lifelong 
remorse. His real assertion here is that 


law and customs of Israel (Acts xxii. 3, 
xxviii. 17), the former the hereditary — 
traditions of the family, as the addition _ 
of pov further signifies. In Acts xxiii. 6 
Paul describes himself as a son of Phari- 
sees. 

Ver. 15. ἀφορίσας. Paul looks back 
on his parentage and early years as a 
providential preparation for his future 
antecedents. By bi 


[9 ------ 


a Greek and Roman citizen, educated in 
the Hebrew Scriptures and in Greek 


learning, he combined in his own person 

the most essential requisites for an Apostle 

to the Gentiles. He was further moulded” 
by the spiritual discipline of an intense, 
though mistaken, zeal for the Law of his 

God, which issued in bitter remorse. By 
this career he was fitted to become a 
chosen vessel to bear the name of Christ 
before the Gentile world. He did not 
hesitate accordingly to regard himself, 


he advanced beyond his fellows in sec- like Hebrew prophets of old (Is. xlix. 





tarian prejudice and persecuting zeal— 





a statement borne out by the history of 
the persecution.—ore. This adverb is 
obviously attached to the preceding sub- 
stantive ἀναστροφήν. 

The imperfects ἐδίωκον . . . describe 
the course of action continuously pursued 
by Saul down to his conversion.—éép- 
θουν. This term is likewise applied in 
Acts ix. 21 to the havoc wrought by Saul 
in the Church. 

Ver. 14. συνηλικιώτας. Saul had 
been educated at Jerusalem, and this 
word points to his contemporaries in the 
schools of the Pharisees.—yéve. This 
term sometimes denotes family, but here 
race and nation, as in Acts xviii. 2, 24. 
So also συγγενής in Rom. ix. 3, xvi. 7, 
21.—{ydwrns. This is not here the 
proper name of a sect, being coupled 
with a genitive, as in Acts xxi. 20. Saul 
had no sympathy with the anarchical sect 
of Zealots who preached the sacred duty 
of revolt from Rome, though he had the 
persecuting zeal of an orthodox Pharisee. 
-- πατρικῶν. This differs in sense from 
πατρῷος. The latter denotes the national 


I, 5, Jer. i. 5), as dedicated from his 
birth to the service of God. 

Ver. 16. ἀποκαλύψαι . . « ἐν ἐμοὶ. 
These words taken alone might denote 
either an inward revelation to Paul him- 
self, or a revelation through him to the 
Gentiles. But the context is decisive in 
favour of the former: for this revelation 
is not only associated closely with his 
conversion and his personal history be- 
tween that and the visit to Arabia, but 
it is expressly stated that it was granted 
with a view to future preaching (tva.. .). 

The context distinguishes this revela- 
tion from the call; it cannot therefore be 
identified with the previous vision of 
Christ on the way, but (as the words 
ἐν ἐμοί import) was an inward and 
spiritual revelation which followed that 
appeal to eye and ear. The history 
corroborates this view: for it relates that_ 
Saul, after his vision, spent three days 
in solitary communion with himself and 
God before he was admitted to Christian 
baptism. — προσανεθέμην. This com- 
pound verb denotes (as in ii. 6) additional 
communication. After direct revelation 


—_— 





SS ee a oe τ νυν -ἧἑ 


. ~~ 








x! ee — ae 
" a 


ae Κι υαωσαθῆν 


"ρος :3 


oo 
ΡΟΣ 


ory 


14—18, 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


τες 


αἵματι, 17. οὐδὲ ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα πρὸς τοὺς πρὸ ἐμοῦ ἀποστό- 
λους, ἀλλ᾽ ἀπῆλθον εἰς ᾿Αραβίαν, καὶ πάλιν ὑπέστρεψα εἰς Δαμασκόν. 
18. Ἔπειτα μετὰ τρία ἔτη ἀνῆλθον εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἱστορῆσαι 


χρια ern SQAP 17, εἴς. ; ern τρια BDEFGKL. 


from God Saul had no occasion to seek 
further advice from man. There is an 
apparent reminiscence in thought and 
language of Christ’s words, flesh and 
blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but 
My Father. 

Ver. 17. ἀνῆλθον. The religious 
eae of Jerusalem as seat of the 

emple and mother-city of the Church, 
its political importance, and its geo- 
graphical position on the central heights 
of Palestine, combined to suggest the 
application of the terms up and down 
to journeys to and from Jerusalem.— 
ἀποστόλους. In the third Gospel and 
early chapters of the Acts this title is 
habitually applied to the Twelve. It was 
extended to Paul and Barnabas on the 
occasion of their mission. In 1 Cor. ix. 
2 Paul and Barnabas are distinctly enu- 
merated amidst the recognised Apostles. 
Rom. xvi. 7 suggests a further extension 
of the title, probably to all founders of 
churches. But with the possible excep- 
tion of James, no addition is recorded to 
the number of the Twelve at Jerusalem 
after Matthias.—’ApaBiavy. No mention 
is made elsewhere of this journey; its 
objeet is clearly indicated by the context ; 
for it is placed in strong contrast with 
human intercourse, and was, therefore, 
undertaken for the sake of solitary com- 
munion with God. The Arabian deserts 
were within easy reach of Damascus. 
Lightfoot suggests, indeed, that Paul 
perhaps repaired to Mount Sinai; but if 
the Apostle had been granted communion 
with God on Mount Sinai, the name 
would have constituted too effective an 
argument in favour of his Divine com- 
mission to be suppressed here. The 
Sinaitic peninsula was, in fact, remote 
from Damascus; the journey was at all 
times dangerous for travellers without 
escort, and in the year 37 (the most 
probable date of Saul’s conversion) was 
hardly possible on account of war be- 
tween King Aretas and the Romans. 

Ver. 18. Ἔπειτα. The thrice-re- 
peated "Ἔπειτα in this verse, in ver. 21, 
and in ii. 1, singles out three events in 


. the Apostle’s life bearing on his inter- 


course with the Church of Jerusalem: 
his first introduction to them, his depar- 
ture to a distant sphere of labour, and 


his return to Jerusalem with Barnabas. 
The object of this sketch was not to 
write a history of those years, but to 
fix attention on certain salient incidents 
which threw light on the real nature of 
his intercourse with Jerusalem. — pera 
τρία ἔτη. A different preposition is here 
employed from that used in ii. 1, which 
describes a mission within fourteen years. 
In this case no precise date is implied; 
for the object is not to date the visit, but 
to show that three full years at least had 
elapsed before Paul had any intercourse 
with the Twelve.—teropjoat: to enquire 
of Cephas, i.e., to obtain information from 
him. This is the usual meaning of the 
verb; in Herodotus, and elsewhere, it 
denotes visits paid to places of interest 
with a yiew to getting information about 
them 6n the spot. The circumstances in 
which Paul found himself at that time 
make this sense very appropriate. He 
had been suddenly driven from his minis- 
try at Damascus, and was compelled to 
seek a new sphere. He could not turn 
to any adviser more valuable than Peter 
for determining his future course. For 
that Apostle was not only prominent in 
the general government of the Church, 
but had taken the lead in its expansion 
by his visits to Samaria, to the maritime 
plain, and to Cesarea, and by his bap- 
tism of Gentiles. In spite, therefore, of 
the eRe of revisiting Jerusalem, Paul 
repaired thither co consult Peter as to 
how he could best serve Christ.—Knbav. 
Several MSS. give the Greek form, ilé- 
τρον, of this name; but the Hebrew 
form appears to be the original reading 
throughout the Epistle, except in ii. 7, 8. 
At Jerusalem he was probably known 
by the name Cephas, but in the Greek 
Church at large by the name Peter.— 
ἐπέμεινα. Both in the Acts and in the 
Pauline Epistles this verb denotes the 
continuance or prolongation of a stay.— 
πρὸς αὐτόν. This can hardly be = παρ᾽ 
αὑτῷ, I abode with him. The clause 
expresses rather the motive for Paul’s 
lingering at Jerusalem, J tarried to see 
him a ite days. 

This narrative is so independent of the 
account given of Paul’s first meeting 
with the Twelve in Acts ix. 26-29, that 
some critics question the identity of the 


ΠΡῸΣ TAAATAS L 


Κηφᾶν,; καὶ ἐπέμεινα πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡμέρας δεκαπέντε: Το. ἕτερον 
δὲ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐκ εἶδον, εἰ μὴ ᾿Ιάκωβον τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ Κυρίου. 
20. ἃ δὲ γράφω ὑμῖν, ἰδοὺ ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὅτι οὐ ψεύδομαι. 
21. Ἔπειτα ἦλθον εἰς τὰ κλίματα τῆς Συρίας καὶ τῆς Κιλικίας " 


Δ Κηφαν SAB 17, εἰς. ; Πετρον SCDEFGKLP, 


two visits. But it is clear that both 
passages alike refer to Paul’s first return 
to Jerusalem, after a prolonged sojourn 
at Damascus; and the subtle harmony 
of the two narratives is as conspicuous 
as their independence in details. The 
history states the bare fact that Paul, 
finding his life in imminent danger from 
the Jews at Damascus, fled to Jerusalem ; 
the Epistle explains why he encountered 
so obvious a danger; the Epistle states 
that he prolonged his stay to see Peter; 
the history explains that he was unable 
to gain access to the Apostles for a time. 
The history records the principal events 
of the visit from the historical point of 
view, ¢.g., the apprehensions felt by the 
Christian body, the intervention of Bar- 
nabas, the attempts on Paul’s life; the 
autobiography passes these by as foreign 
to its purpose, but is far richer in per- 
sonal details, relating incidentally the 
date, the motive, and the duration of the 
visit, and particularising the brethren 
whom Paul saw on the occasion; where- 
as in the Acts mention is merely made 
of the disciples generally. 

Ver. 19. εἰ μὴ Ἰάκωβον. εἰ μή may 
either state an exception to the preceding 
negative clause (=except, save), or merely 
qualify it (Ξε δέ only), as it does in Luke 
iv. 26, to none of them, sc., the widows in 
Israel, but only to Sarepta in Sidon ; and 
in Gal. i. 7, no other Gospel, only (et μή) 
there are some that pervert the Gospel. 
The latter appears to be its meaning 
here. If James had been entitled an 
Apostle, the author would probably have 
written that he saw no other Apostles but 
Peter and James. But here he states 
emphatically that he saw no second (ére- 

ov) Apostle, only James. The Epistle, 
fike the Acts (see xii. 17, xv. 13, xxi. 18), 
fully recognises the leading position of 
James in the local Church (cf. ii. 9, 12) ; 
and the ecclesiastical tradition which 
entitles him Bishop of Jerusalem corre- 
sponds to this. All the evidence left of 
his life suggests that he clung throughout 
his Christian life to Jerusalem and did not 
undertake such missionary labours as 
would entitle him to the designation of 
Apostle.—réov ἀδελφὸν. .. James is 


here described as the brother of the Lord 
in order to distinguish him from James 
the son of Zebedee, who was living at the 
time of Paul’s first visit; but elsewhere 
as James: after the death of the other 
James there could be no question who 
was meant. 

Ver. 20. The solemnity of this appeal 
to God in attestation of His truth marks at 
once the importance which Paul attached 
to his independence of human teachers, 
and the persistency of the misrepresenta- 
tion to which he had been exposed.— 
ἰδοὺ. This imperative is always used 
interjectionally in Scriptures: the sub- 
sequent ὅτι depends on ἐνώπιον τ. Θεοῦ, 
which has the force of an attestation. 

Vv. 21-23. About ten years of the life 
of Paul, between his flight from Jerusalem 
to Tarsus and his return to Jerusalem for 
the Apostolic Council, are here passed 
over. They were spent, partly in and 
around Tarsus and Antioch, partly in the 


joint mission with Barnabas to Cyprus 


and Asia Minor. The Galatians were 
already acquainted with the leading facts 
of that period, and it was needless to refer 
to them here: enough that he spent those 
years, like those at Damascus, in an in- 
dependent ministry at a distance from 
Jerusalem. He did indeed repair thither 
once with Barnabas to carry alms from 
Antioch to the Elders; but circum- 
stances prevented any intercourse with 
the Twelve at that time: for before 
they reached the city the Herodian per- 
secution had begun, and the leading 
Christians were in peril of death at the 
hands of Herod. Paul himself can only 
have paid a secret and hurried visit to 
the city, and thought it needless appar- 
ently to mention it in this place.—«A- 
para. This word denotes the fringes 
of coastland sloping down from the 
mountains to the sea in north-western 
Syria and eastern, #.e. Roman, Cilicia. 
It is applied in 2 Cor, xi. to to the 
coastlands of Achaia. 

The name Syria is placed before Cilicia, 
though the ministry at Tarsus preceded 
that at Antioch: for the latter was by 
far the more important and prolonged 
ministry. A further reason for placing 











19—24. II. 2. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAZ 


157 


22. ἤμην δὲ dyvoodpevos τῷ προσώπῳ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας 
ταῖς ἐν Χριστῷ - 23. μόνον δὲ ἀκούοντες ἦσαν ὅτι ὁ διώκων ἡμᾶς ποτε 


Viv εὐαγγελίζεται τὴν πίστιν ἥν ποτε ἐπόρθει. 


ἐν ἐμοὶ τὸν Θεόν. 


Syria first was the subordinate position 
of Cilicia: for Roman Cilicia was, like 
Judea, only a district of the great pro- 
vince of Syria, separately administered 
by an imperial procurator at Tarsus. 

In Acts xv. 41 Syria and Cilicia are 
coupled together as forming a single 
region (τὴν Συρίαν καὶ Κιλικίαν), no 
article being inserted before Κιλικίαν; 
not so here, for the first ministry at Tar- 
sus was distinct from that at Antioch. 

Ver. 22. ἤμην δὲ dyv. The correct 
translation is not 1 was unknown (as our 
versions render it), but I was becoming 
unknown. At the beginning of this 
period he was a familiar figure in Jeru- 
salem, but in the course of ten years’ 
absence he gradually became a stranger 
to the Christians of Judza.—éxxAnotats. 
This passage speaks of the Churches of 

udzea in the plural, as does also 1 Thess. 

li, 14. In the Acts the Church through- 
out Judza, Galilee and Samaria is de- 
scribed as a single Church according to 
the text of the best MSS. (ix. 31): the 
funds contributed for the relief of the 
poor Christians in Judza are handed 
over to the Elders at Jerusalem (xi. 29, 
xii. 25); brethren from Judza are cen- 
sured as members of their own body 
by the assembled Church at Jerusalem 
(xv. 1,24). It would seem from this that 
an effective unity of administration and 
control existed in Jerusalem side by side 
with local organisation of the several 
Churches of Judza. 

Ver. 23. The faith seems to be here 
identified with the living body of be- 
lievers, for this verse describes Saul as 
making havoc of the faith, while ver. 13 
applies that term to the Church. 

Ver. 24. They glorified God in Saul, 
ascribing the change entirely to the grace 
of God working on his heart. 

CuapTerR II.—Vv. 1-10. NARRATIVE 
OF THE AUTHOR’S VISIT WITH BARNABAS 
TO THE CHURCH OF JERUSALEM, HIS 
FRUITLESS NEGOTIATIONS WITH PARTY 
LEADERS, AND THE BROTHERLY WELCOME 
AND RECOGNITION HE RECEIVED FROM 
een PETER AND JoHN.—The author 


first thirteen years of his Christian life 
how independent he had been of human 
teaching at his conversion and_sub- 
sequently. He now proceeds to record 


wn by a rapid glance over the 


24. καὶ ἐδόξαζον 


11. τ. Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν 


the true history of the negotiations which 
he had undertaken at Jerusalem in con- 
junction with Barnabas in the fourteenth 
year of his ministry. (On the identity 
of this conference with the Apostolic 
Council, whose proceedings are recorded 
in Acts xv., see Introd., pp. 141-144). 
The Galatians were well aware of the 
position of Paul and Barnabas in the 
Church of Antioch: it was not therefore 
necessary to state in express terms that 
they. were deputed to represent that 
Church. Enough that their first act 
was to lay before the Church of Jerusalem 
an account of the Gospel they were 
preaching to the Gentiles, and that their 
divine commission to the Gentiles was 
fully recognised by the leaders of the 
Church at Jerusalem. They knew already 
the general outline of events: for the 
resolution adopted at Jerusalem, and 
subsequently approved at Antioch, had 
been duly communicated to them by 
Paul himself. His object in this Epistle 
is to remove misconstruction as to his 
own position. His reference of this 
question to the Church of Jerusalem had 
been misrepresented as an act of sub- 
mission and acknowledgment of his own 
inferiority, whereas he had really procured 
the condemnation of the false brethren 
who denied his authority, had silenced 
his opponents, and met with brotherly 
fellowship and full recognition at the 
hands of James Peter and John. 

Ver. 1. 81a Sexar. ἐτῶν. Greek usage 
in calculating intervals of time between 
two events reckons two years for the two 
broken years at the beginning and end 
of the period. Some critics, notably 
Lightfoot, calculate this period from the 
meeting with Peter mentioned in i. 18: 
but this attaches far too much importance 
to that interview. It is only mentioned 
and its date loosely indicated in order to 
show that three full years passed before 
they had any intercourse. The dominant 
note of time throughout in the mind of 
the author is surely the conversion: and 
the object of specifying a period of time 
here, as in i. 18, is to show how many 
years of Christian life had passed before 
the event.—Tfrov. The names of the 
Christians who accompanied Paul and 
Barnabas are not given in Acts xv. 2. 
It appears that Titus, a Greek Christian, 


158 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAZ Il. 


ἀνέβην εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρνάβα, συμπαραλαβὼν καὶ Τίτον - 
2. ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν, καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον 
ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι, κατ᾽ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσι, μή πως εἰς 
nevov τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον 3. (ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν ἐμοὶ, Ἕλλην ὧν, 


pne of Paul’s own children in Christ, 
was among them, and that Paul was 
responsible for his selection. His choice 
of a Greek for his companion evinces 
the determined spirit with which he 
started on his mission. 

Ver. 2. κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν. This 
statement of Paul’s motive is in no 
way inconsistent with the independent 
statement in the Acts that he was deputed 
by the Church. The revelation may 
have come to Paul himself, and in that 
case he prompted the decision of the 
Church, of which he and Barnabas were 
at that time the ruling spirits; or it may 
have been made through the Spirit to 
the Church, in which case Paul would 
count it right at once to obey his voice. 
--᾽ὠὀνεθέμην ...- Two different methods 
of action are here specified, public 
addresses describing the nature and 
result of the Apostle’s preaching among 
the Greeks, and private interviews with 
individual brethren or groups of brethren. 
The term κατ᾽ ἰδίαν does not imply 
secrecy in these communications. The 
context shows that the point at issue 
was the circumcision of Gentile converts. 
- τοῖς δοκοῦσιν. As this phrase recurs 
four times in eight verses, it is necessary 
to determine its true meaning with some 
precision. δοκεῖν nowhere else conveys 
the idea of superiority implied in our 
versions, of reputation (of repute R.V.). 
The two passages adduced in its support 
do not stand the test of criticism: in 
Eur., Heracl., 897 there is an obvious 
ellipsis of εὐτυχεῖν, in Hec., 295 of δόξαν 
ἔχειν. In the latter indeed δοκούντων 
appears to be a cynical comment of the 
deposed queen on the unreality of outward 
glory. 

In fact δοκεῖν, like seem in English, 
was either a neutral term which expressed 
according to the context any impression, 
good or bad, produced by the appearance 
of an object, or it laid stress on the 
unreality of the mere outward semblance. 
The Greeks dwelt often on the contrast 
between δοκεῖν and εἶναι embodied in 
the famous line of Aéschylus οὐ yap 
δοκεῖν δίκαιος ἀλλ᾽ εἶναι θέλει. In 
ver. 6 this contrast reappears in the 
antithesis between δοκοῦντες εἶναι and 
ποτε ἦσαν. In ver. 9, on the contrary, 


ot δοκοῦντες, coupled as it is there with 
στύλοι εἶναι, denotes the high estimate 
formed of the Three. The elliptical 
phrase ἀνεθέμην τοῖς δοκοῦσιν in ver. 
2 should in like manner be interpreted 
by the context. I take it to mean dve- 
θέμην ols ἐδόκει δεῖν ἀναθέσθαι. Paul, 
as he states, brought the matter in 
private interviews before those whom it 
seemed right to approach in that way, sc., 
influential opponents, whose hostility he 
was anxious to deprecate.—py πως .. « 
It was of vital moment to the welfare 
of the Greek Churches at that time to 
avoid a breach with Jerusalem. Besides 
embracing a minority of Jewish Christians, 
they were leavened through and through 
with Jewish influences, so that a quarrel 
might have led to a disastrous schism in 
all the existing Churches. More than 
this, they relied still mainly on the Old 
Testament for the basis of their theology 
and morals. The abundant promise of 
harvest among the Greeks rested still 
on the nucleus of devout Gentiles who 
had been prepared by the teaching of 
the synagogue for the lessons of Christ’s 
Apostles. τρέχω . . - ἔδραμον. The 
present subjunctive is coupled here with 
the aorist indicative, as it is in 1 Thess. 
iii. 5, to express the fear of present 
failure, coupled with a dread that past 
labours had been rendered futile. 

Ver. 3. Howbeit even Titus, who was 
with me, being a Greek, had not been 
compelled to he circumcised, The last 
verse related the steps taken by Paul to 
disarm opposition. He was, however, no 
less resolute in his resistance to any en- 
croachment on Christian freedom. The 
presence of Titus with him attested his 
determination; for the circumcision of 
Titus had been demanded, and resisted 
evidently by Paulhimself. It is a strange 
misconception of critics to argue as if this 
struggle over Titus took place at Jeru- 
salem. The demand for the circumcision 
of all converts was made at Antioch and 
pressed against the authority of Paul and 
Barnabas (Acts xx. 2): the express object 
of the deputation was to protest against 
this demand, which they did with entire 
success. The Greek aorist ἠναγκάσθη 
answers here to the English pluperfect, 
as often elsewhere (cf. Winer, xl., 5). 


ae 





mms τς 
‘eee 


es 
Key 


4". .... 





2--ὃ. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


159 


ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι "), 4. διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους Weudaddr- 
φους, οἵτινες παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν 
ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ ‘Ingo, ἵνα ἡμᾶς καταδουλώσουσιν 1 - 5. οἷς οὐδὲ 2 
πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ, ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου δια- 


μείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 


6. ᾿Απὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι (ὁποῖοί ποτε 


1 καταδουλωσουσιν ΑΒΟΌΕΕΕ ; -σονται L; “«σωνται Κ, 
3οις ουδὲ NABCDcorr-EFGKLP; om. Ὁ. 


Ver. 4. The narrative returns here, 
after the parenthetical reference to Titus, 
to the subject of vv. 1, 2, and the verb 
ἀνέβην, already repeated in ver. 2, must 
here also be supplied to complete the 
sense: But it was because of the false 
brethren privily brought in that I went 
up, men who came in. ... The addition 
of the article, rightly inserted by the 
Revised Version before false brethren, 
shows that they were a particular body 
of convicted offenders against Christ, of 
whose guilt the Galatians had been al- 


ready informed. The force of παρεισ- 
dxrovs is well illustrate trabo, xvii, 
ΔΑΒ 794, where it denotes the treacherous 





Ρ Fo ctge epee ee 
“introduction Οἱ uction Ro 
city by a faction within the walls. In 


the next clause παρεισῆλθον describes 
the stealthy entrance of these secret foes ; 
κατασκοπῆσαι marks their hostile intent, 
and likens them to spies who are bent on 
discovering to an enemy the weak points 
in a military position: the freedom of the 
Greek Churches in Christ is further de- 
clared to be the object of their hostility. 
This description brings the Epistle into 
close touch with the Acts: for it is there 
stated that Paul and Barnabas were driven 
to go up to Jerusalem by the factious oppo- 
sition of certain foreign emissaries from 
Judza who attacked the freedom of the 
Greek converts from circumcision and 
disturbed the peace of the Church; also 
that these men were altogether repu- 
diated and condemned at Jerusalem by 
the Apostles and brethren, and finally 
that the document embracing this sen- 
tence of condemnation had been placed 
by Paul himself in the hands of the 
Galatians. ‘There can be no doubt, in 
view of this close correspondence, that 
the false brethren whom the Epistle de- 
nounces are identical with the Pharisaic 
emissaries who stirred up strife at Antioch. 
--καταδουλώσουσιν. All the best MSS. 
agree in reading this future indicative in- 
stead of the subjunctive after ἵνα ; possibly 
the author meant to express thereby the 
assured hope of success, and not merely 
the intention of the conspirators. 


Ver. 5. εἴξαμεν. Paul here couples 
Barnabas with himself in recording the 
determined resistance offered by both to 
the demand for the circumcision of all 
Christians preferred at Antioch. Bar- 
nabas was at that time a staunch sup- 
porter of Greek freedom. The verse 
Obviously refers to their attitude at 
Antioch before going to Jerusalem.—rjj 
ὑποταγῇ: by our submission. Here, as 
in 2 Cor, ix, 13, ὑποταγή denotes a 
voluntary act, not one imposed upon 
a subject. The same rendering appears 
more appropriate for expressing the due 
attitude of wife and children in 1 Tim. 
ii. 11, iii. 4. The middle voice ὑποτάσ- 
σεσθαι is five times rendered submit in 
the Authorised Version, and the force of 
the original is impaired by its exclusion 
from the text of the Revised Version.— 
Wa... The motive for firmness was the 
maintenance of the truth of the Gospel, 
i.e., of the freedom to which the uncircum- 
cised were entitled in Christ. —mpés ὑμᾶς : 

i,¢., with a view t 6. 
The rendering of our versions, with you, 
would be properly expressed by ἐν ὑμῖν. 

Ver. 6. The author here resumes the 
broken thread of the narrative, which he 
interrupted after ver. 2 in order to show 
that his conciliatory attitude at Jerusalem 
was not due to weakness or irresolution. 
He now proceeds to relate the sequel of 
the advances which he made at Jerusalem 
to the Pharisaic party. The repetition of 
the phrase of δοκοῦντες, and the fresh 
transition from the plural εἴξαμεν to the 
singular ἐμοί, indicate the fresh shifting 
of the scene from Antioch back to Jeru- 
salem. The first clause is left unfinished, 
for the mention of these men who seemed 
to be anything leads the author to in- 
terrupt his narrative again that he may 
challenge their right to be heard; he 
breaks, accordingly, into the disparaging 
comment, what manner of men they had 
once been, maketh no matter—a forcible 
expression of his disappointment at find- 
ing so little Christian sympathy or life 
where he had hoped to find so much. 
After this parenthesis he remoulds the 


160 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


Il, 


ἦσαν οὐδέν por διαφέρει - πρόσωπον Θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει)---- 


ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο. 


7. ᾿Αλλὰ τοὐναντίον, 


ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας, καθὼς 

Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς 8. (ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν 

τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησε καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη), 9. καὶ γνόντες τὴν 

χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι, ᾿Ιάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς ' καὶ ᾿Ιωάννης, οἱ 
11. και Κηφας Φ ΒΟΚΤΡ; Πετρος και |. DEFG. 


form of his sentence; and οἱ δοκοῦντες, 
the subject of ἦσαν, becomes the subject 
of the verb προσανέθεντο. Instead, there- 
fore, of concluding the sentence in its 
original form, and stating that from those 
who so seemed he got no response, he 
writes, to me, I say, those who so seemed 
communicated nothing further.—rév δο- 
κούντων εἶναί τι. These are identified 
with τοῖς δοκοῦσιν in ver.2. They are 
there described as men whom it was 
thought advisable to approach in private, 
here as men who were thought fo be 
anything, i.e., to have any weight in the 
Church. The English version somewhat 
suggests that they held high office and 
were in positions of dignity, perhaps 
Apostles; but the Greek order in that 
case must have been τί εἶναι, nor can 
that emphasis be justified in rendering 
the encliti¢ τι after εἶναι. They were 
probably party-leaders, but the Apostle 
writes of them with scant respect as men 
who were now little better than a name. 
- ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν ...: What manner 
of men they had once been maketh no 
matter to me. The margin of the Re- 
vised Version rightly renders ὁποῖοι as 
an indirect interrogative dependent on 
διαφέρει, and gives to wore its true sense 
of formerly, in time past (as in 1. 13, 23). 
Coupled as it is here with wore, ἦσαν 
has the force of a pluperfect, and con- 
trasts the character of these men as 
reported from past time with what Paul 
actually found them to be: he could get 
no brotherly help or counsel from them. 
Therefore he pronounces the adverse 
judgment upon them (πρόσωπον . .. 

αμβάνει); for, like his Master (Luke 
xx. 21),.he regarded no man’s person, 
if weighed in the balance and found 
wanting.—épol... προσανέθεντο. This 
clause forms an antithesis to ἀνεθέμην 
τοῖς δοκοῦσιν in ver. 2. Paul had laid 
before them an account of his successful 
ministry among the Greeks, but they had 
no further response to make in the shape 
of Christian sympathy, or of fresh argu- 
ment in justification of their prejudices 
against him and his teaching. 


Ver. 7. The emphatic opening of this 
verse, ᾿Αλλὰ τοὐναντίον, gives promi- 
nence to the thorough contrast pre- 
sented by James, Cephas and John to 
the cold reserve of these suspicious and 
prejudiced opponents, It is perfectly 
clear in the Greek text, though unfor- 
tunately not in the English versions, 
that they are the subject throughout 
vv. 7-9, and that the participles ἰδόντες 
and γνόντες refer to them as well as the 
verb ἔδωκαν. But contrariwise Fames 
and Cephas and Fohn ... when they 
saw ... and perceived the grace that 
was given unto me, gave to me and 
Barnabas right hands of fellowship. 
They saw in the marvellous success of 
Paul and Barnabas a visible token of 
their divine commission and of the grace 
bestoweduponthem. These were doubt- 
less the real authors of the final resolution 
adopted by the Council; and its hearty 
appreciation of their beloved Barnabas 
and Paul, men that have hazarded their 
lives for the name of the Lord Fesus 
Christ coincides with the language of 
the Epistle.—MNérpos. In this and the 
next verse the Greek name is used to 
designate the Apostle of the circumcision, 
probably because he was already known 
to the whole Greek world as an Apostle 
underthatname. In Jerusalem, however, 
and as a man, he habitually went by his 
Hebrew surname Cephas, and that name 
is accordingly given him elsewhere in the 
Epistle. © 

Ver. 8. ἐνεργήσας. When this verb 
is applied to the work of the Spirit in the 
hearts of men, the preposition év is added 
to it. The absence of ἐν before Πέτρῳ 
and ἐμοί indicates that this verse is not 
describing the work of grace in the hearts 
of Peter and Paul, but the work of God 
for them, i.¢e., for the furtherance of the 
Gospel which they preached. 

Ver.g. The name of James is placed 
vefore those of the Apostles Peter and 
John. This was probably because as 
permanent head of the local Church he 
presided at meetings (cf. Acts xxi. 18). 
The well-known strictness of his own 











7—II. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


161 


δοκοῦντες στύλοι εἶναι, δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ κοινωνίας, 
ἵνα ἡμεῖς ' εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήν - 10, μόνον τῶν 
πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν, ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι. 
11. Ὅτε δὲ ἦλθε Κηφᾶς " εἰς ᾿Αντιόχειαν, κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐτῷ 


᾿ημεις SBFGKLP; ἡμεῖς μὲν SQ2ACDE, 


7Kndas NABCHP; 


legal observance gave special weight to 
his support of Greek freedom on this 
occasion. A comparison of his address 
with the subsequent resolution of the 
Council suggests that he took a leading 
part in drafting some part of it at least. 
—ol δοκοῦντες στύλοι εἶναι. The habit- 
ual application to the Church of figures 
borrowed from a temple of God suggested 
ths description of Apostles as pillars. 
It occurs also in Clement of Rome and 
Ignatius. The repetition of the phrase 
οἱ δοκοῦντες is apparently designed to 
contrast the high estimate formed of the 
Three with the unfounded and indefinite 
estimate of others who had proved to be 
mere names.—tva . . . The mutual 
understanding between the two groups 
of Apostles obviously did not imply an 
absolute restriction of each to one section 
ofthe Church. All converts alike were 
members of a single united Church: 
circumstances of themselves forbade any 
definite division: Paul opened his minis- 
try everywhere in the synagogue, and 
numbered Jews as well as Greeks amidst 
his converts. So Peter again is next 
found at Antioch. 
_ Ver. 10. μόνον . . . ἵνα. A verb 
must be supplied out of δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν 
expressive of the pledge that the other 
Apostles exacted from Barnabas and 
Paul. τῶν πτωχῶν. These words are 
displaced from their grammatical position 
after pynpovevwpev in order to lay stress 


᾿ upon the poor being the central object 


of the appeal. Judza suffered often from 
famine in apostolic times, and Christians 


were probably the worst sufferers owing 
to religious ill-will and social persecution. 


This passage implies chronic poverty. 


' So also does the history of the Pauline 
_ Contribution, which was not δὴ effort 
_ to meet a special emergency, for it took 


more than a year to collect, but a fund 
_ organised to meet a permanent demand 

_ for systematic help.—d. The addition 
of τοῦτο after αὐτό shows that 6 is not 
the object of ποιῆσαι, but is used with 
adverbial force for a connecting particle, 
as ini. 7, as for which.—xaléornovdaca : 
not I also, for this would require καὶ ἐγώ 


VOL. IL, 


Nerpos DEFGKL, 


in the Greek text. The force of καί is 
to intensify the following verb. J was 
not only willing, but was indeed zealous 
to do so. 

Vv. 11-.4. INTRIGUE AT ANTIOCH 
TO AFFIX THE STIGMA OF UNCLEANNESS 
ON UNCIRCUMCISED BRETHREN, COUNTE- 
NANCED BY PETER AND BARNABAS, BUT 
OPENLY REBUKED BY PAUL.—The gather- 
ing of many Christians at Antioch after 
the Apostolic Council during the sojourn 
of Paul and Barnabas in that city is 
recorded in the Acts, but no mention is 
made of Peter or of this episode. The 
omission is instructive, for it bears out 
the impression which the Epistle itself 
conveys that the collision was a transitory 
incident, and had no lasting effect on 
Church history. The fact, however, that 
Peter and Barnabas both consented to 
affix the stigma of uncleanness on their 
uncircumcised brethren rather than incur 
the obloquy of eating with them bears 
striking testimony to the strength of the 
prejudices which then prevailed among 
Jewish Christians. Neither of them had 
any real scruples about intercourse with 
these brethren: Peter had been taught 
of God long ago not to call any unclean 
whom God had cleansed, and had recently 
protested at Jerusalem against laying the 
yoke of the Law upon the neck of the 
disciples; Barnabas had ministered for 
years to Greek converts, had championed 
their cause at Jerusalem with Paul, and 
had like Peter consorted with them freely 
of late: yet neither of them had the 
moral courage to act up to their con- 
victions under the eyes of the brethren 
from Jerusalem. Their vacillation attests 
the difficulty of retaining Jews and Greeks 
in one communion, and the wisdom and 
prudence which guided the decision of 
the Apostolic Council. But that decision 
had materially strengthened Paul’s posi- 
tion. A basis of union had been formally 
ratified between the two Churches of 
Jerusalem and Antioch. The Church of 
Jerusalem by calling on Greek Christiant 
to consent, as they had done, to certain 
prescribed forms of abstinence had vir- 
tually bound themselves to accept these 


II 


162 


ἄντέστην, ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦν. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


Il, 


12. πρὸ τοῦ yap ἐλθεῖν τινὰς ἀπὸ 


Ἰακώβου, μετὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν συνήσθιεν - ὅτε δὲ ἦλθον, ὑπέστελλε καὶ 


1y\Oov ACD°EHKLP; ηλθεν NBD'!FG. 


as conditions of intercourse, and the 
withdrawal from the common meal vio- 
lated therefore the spirit of a solemn 
treaty. Paul had therefore strong ground 
for remonstrance, independently of his 
authority in his own Church, and his 
protest was evidently effectual, though 
he refrains from recording Peter’s humil- 
iating retreat from a false position. For 
it is recorded here for the express purpose 
of exemplifying his successful vindication 
of his apostolic rights. 

The early Fathers shrank from ad- 
mitting the moral cowardice of which 
Peter was guilty on this occasion, and 
made various efforts to evade the plain 
sense. Clement of Alexandria questioned 
the identity of Cephas with the Apostle. 
Origen propounded a theory that the 
scene was a preconcerted plot between 
the two Apostles for the confutation of 
the Judaisers; and this theory prevailed 
extensively in spite of the discredit which 
it cast on the character of both until it 
was effectually exposed by Augustine in 
controversy with Jerome, who had him- 
self adopted it. 

Again, this momentary collision be 
ween the two great Apostles was dis- 
torted by party spirit into an evidence 
of personal rivalry. Their preeminence 
in their two respective spheres has been 
already noted as early as the Apostolic 
Council, and this led, perhaps inevitably, 
to personal comparison. In the Corin- 
thian Church opposite partisans adopted 
their names for rival watch-words. At 
a later time elaborate fictions of their 
lifelong antagonism were invented and 
circulated in the Clementine literature. 
But the collision here mentioned was 
obviously a transitory incident. The 
language of gratitude and esteem ap- 
plied to Peter elsewhere in the Epistle 
precludes any idea of permanent es- 
trangement. — ὅτι κατεγνωσμένος ἦν. 
Our versions are surely wrong in giving 
a causal force to ὅτι in this clause, for it 
adduces no clear and reasonable justifica- 
tion of the opposition offered. It is much 
better to take ὅτι as declarative: Paul is 
here stating the ground which he took up 
against Peter: I withstood him, saying 
that he had condemned himself. He 
urged that Peter was condemned by his 
own inconsistency. By first eating with 


Gentiles and then pressing upon them 
observance of the very principles that 
he had violated he was playing fast and 
loose with the Law. 

Ver. 12. “lax@Bov. Any visitors from 
the Church of Jerusalem might perhaps 
be said to come from James, who was 
its permanent head; but these brethren 
appear to have been in special sympathy 
with James in regard to their strict ob- 
servance of the Law, and the respect 
paid by Peter to their opinion suggests 
that they were representative men, pro- 
bably deputed for some purpose by their 
Church. There is, however, no reason 
to conclude that James prompted or 
approved the intrigue against Gentile 
freedom at Antioch. Scrupulous as he 
was about observing the Law, he had 
taken a leading part at Jerusalem in 
shaping the recent contract with their 
Gentile brethren, and was the last man 
to sanction an evasion of its terms. 

The imperfect tenses ὑπέστελλεν, ἀφώ- 
ριζεν give a graphic picture of Peter’s 
irresolute and tentative efforts to with- 
draw gradually from an intercourse that 
gave offence to the visitors.—r. ἐκ περι- 
τομῆς. The omission of τῆς before περι- 
τομῆς is conclusive against the rendering 
of our versions, them . . . of the circum- 
cision. For περιτομή without an article 
does not denote the body of men, but the 
rite. By τ- ἐκ περιτομῆς are meant the 
party who based their faith on circum- 
cision, and made that the charter of God’s 
covenant rather than baptism, and not the 
Jewish Christians in general. It is clear 
from the context that the Circumcision as 
a body did eat with their brethren until 
Peter set the example of withdrawal 
through fear of this determined minority 
of partisans. In Acts xi. 2 the phrase 
obviously singles out a particular party 
who pressed the claims of circumcision 
in an assembly consisting wholly of cir- 
cumcised men. In Acts x. 45 οἱ ἐκ π. 
πιστοί distinguishes those who believed 
after circumcision from the uncircumcised 
who believed; and in Col. iv. τὶ of ὄντες 
ἐκ π. οὗτοι μόνοι συνεργοί designates 
those men who were my only fellow: 
workers after circumcision. (For the 
force of the elliptical phrase ot ἐκ cf. iii. 
7,9, Rom. iv. 14.) 

Ver. 13. συνυπεκρίθησαν . . . ὑποκρί- 








12--15. 


ἀφώριζεν ἑαυτὸν, φοβούμενος τοὺς ἐκ περιτομῆς. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


163 


13. καὶ συνυπε- 


κρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ᾿Ιουϑδαῖοι, ὥστε καὶ Βαρνάβας συναπήχθη 


αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει. 


14. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ὅτε εἶδον ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθοποδοῦσι πρὸς 


τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, εἶπον τῷ Κηφᾷ ' ἔμπροσθεν πάντων, 


Εἰ σὺ, ᾿Ιουδαῖος ὑπάρχων, ἐθνικῶς ζῇς 


καὶ οὐκ ᾿Ιουδαϊκῶς, Was? τὰ 


ἔθνη ἀναγκάζεις ᾿Ιουδαΐζειν ; 15. ἡμεῖς φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι, καὶ οὐκ ἐξ 


1 Κηφᾳ SABC 17, εἴς. ; Πετρῳ DEFGKLP, 


2 ws SABCDEFGP; 


oa. The verb ὑποκρίνεσθαι is often 
used of playing a part as an actor in 
a play without any invidious meaning ; 
but ὑπόκρισις corresponds throughout 
the N.T. to its English equivalent hypo- 
crisy, and fidelity to the Greek text almost 
demands that rendering here. The men 
who had hitherto eaten with the uncir- 
cumcised and now withdrew because they 
shrank from giving offence were, in fact, 
affecting religious scruples which they did 
not feel, and the Apostle does not hesitate 
to denounce such insincerity by its true 
name hypocrisy.—xal BapvaBas: even 
Barnabas. The defection of Barnabas 
was a heavier blow to the cause of 
Gentile freedom than the vacillation of 
Peter. With the single exception of 
Paul himself, Barnabas had been the 
most effective minister of Christ for the 
conversion of Greeks; he had been of late 
deputed to appear with Paul as their re- 
presentative in Jerusalem, and his with- 
drawal from social communion with 
Greek Christians fell upon them with 
the force of a betrayal. Yet Paul, who 
had been for many years his most inti- 
mate companion, and knew his heart, 
writes more. in sorrow than in anger of 
his lamentable weakness in being led 
away by evil example. For he saw that 
he was the victim of stronger wills than 
his own. Jerusalem had been his early 
home and the place of his earliest min- 
istry. The Twelve had been his first 
teachers in Christ: his cousin John Mark, 
who was even then in Antioch, was so 
dear to him that Barnabas, when driven 
to choose between him and Paul, chose 
Mark for the companion of his future 
ministry. What wonder then that he 
was tempted on this occasion for a mo- 
ment to yield to the influence of Peter 
and the brethren from Jerusalem! 

Ver. 14. πρὸς τ. ἀλήθειαν. Our ver- 
sions render πρός, according to, like κατά: 
and so impugn these men for want of 
uprightness in their conduct rather than 
for inconsistency of doctrine, But the 


τι KL. 


censure of the Apostle is really directed 
to the falsehood of their teaching. They 
were not dealing straightforwardly with 
the truth in casting the slur of unclean- 
ness on those whom God had cleansed 
in Christ.—dvayxd{ers. Peter was by his 
example really putting a severe pressure 
on Gentile converts to adopt a Jewish 
rule of life, though perhaps unintention 
ally.—tmdpxywv. This participle notes 
the bearing of antecedents on present 
action. Peter being a Jew might have 
been expected to act otherwise. 

Vv. 15-21. JEWS THEMSELVES WERE 
DRIVEN TO RESORT TO CHRIST ΑΒ SIN- 
NERS FOR PARDON BECAUSE THEY COULD 
NOT OBTAIN JUSTIFICATION BY PERFECT 
OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW—NOT THAT 
THEY MIGHT THEREBY BECOME MORE 
FREE TO SIN, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF 
NEW LIFE IN CHRIST, EVEN AS PAUL 
HIMSELF ENDURED CRUCIFIXION WITH 
CHRIST, THAT CHRIST MIGHT LIVE IN 
HIM. Ver.15. As the next verse opens, 
according to the Greek MSS., with εἰδότες 
82, it is necessary to understand here a 
finite verb, We are Fews, etc. 

The personal narrative breaks on 
abruptly at this point. Peter drops out 
of sight, and the Epistle passes from a 
protest against his vacillation into an 
elaborate argument against the doctrinal 
errors of the Pharisaic party, which forms 
too integral a portion of the whole Epistle 
to be detached from it. Yet the new 
strain of thought springs so directly out 
of the previous remonstrance that it 
might well have been addressed there 
and then to the Jewish Christians at 
Antioch. The outspoken protest against 
an insidious attempt to force on Gentiles 
the Jewish rule of life leads naturally to 
an enquiry what this rule has done for 
men who are Jews by birth. Did it 
justify them before God? We know that 
it did not: they had to turn to Christ for 
the peace with God which the Law could 
not give. In short, vv. 15-21 are con- 
nected at once with the preceding matter 


164 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS Il, 


ἐθνῶν ἁμαρτωλοὶ, 16. εἰδότες BE! ὅτι οὐ ϑικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ 
ἔργων νόμου, ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Χριστοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ,Σ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς 
Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐπιστεύσαμεν, ἵνα δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ, 
καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου - ὅτι ὃ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου“ οὐ δικαιωθήσεται 
πᾶσα σάρξ. τῇῆ. εἰ δὲ ζητοῦντες δικαιωθῆναι ἐν Χριστῷ εὑρέθημεν 


1 δε SBCD'!E!FGL; om. AD®KP. 

3 Χριστου Inoov AB 17; |. Χριστου SCDEFGKLP, 
Sort NABDFG 17, εἴς. ; Stor. CD°EKLP. 

4 εξ epywv vopov before ev Sux. NABCDEFGP, 


and the subsequent; and apparently re- 
produce in substance an argument which 
had already been addressed, viva voce, to 
the circumcision-party at Antioch, whom 
the Apostle identifies in spirit and policy 
with the subsequent agitators in Galatia. 
—ovx ἐξ ἐθνῶν ap. This clause expresses 
pointedly the insolent contempt of the 
Pharisaic party for Gentiles, who did not 
belong to the holy nation nor inherit the 
Law and the Covenants, Yet in spite of 
these arrogant pretensions to superior 
sanctity (it is added) they were driven by 
the verdict of their own conscience to 
embrace the faith of Christ because they 
knew that no flesh could possibly be so 
perfect in obedience to Law as to be 
thereby justified. 
Ver. 16. οὐ δικαιοῦται . . . Two 
methods of seeking justification in the 
sight of God are here distinguished. 
The former took account of nothing but 
stedfast obedience to the law of God. 
Before his conversion Paul knew no 
other: he had been taught by his legal 
training to base his standard of right and 
wrong entirely on the revealed law, to 
find in it the sole guide of conscience, 
and to measure righteousness by con- 
formity to its commandments alone. 
But his view of God’s judgment had 
been profoundly modified by his con- 
version. He had learnt on the one 
hand from the teaching of Christ how 
impossible it was for man to attain to 
perfect righteousness, seeing that God 
claims not only obedience to the letter 
of the law, but an allegiance of the heart 
too thorough to be attainable by human 
infirmity. But on the other hand he 
knew now that God is a loving Father 
in Christ, ever seeking out His erring 
children that He may win them back, 
ever ready to temper strict justice with 
infinite mercy, and waiting only for the 
first response of imperfect faith and im- 
perfect repentance, so they be at all 
sincere, to blot out a guilty past, and 


pronounce a favourable judgment on the 
sinner. He perceived that there is room 
in the judgment of God for another 
element beside strict justice, viz., the 
mercy of the judge, and that a prisoner, 
however clear may be his guilt on the 
evidence of his life, may nevertheless be 
assured of pardon and acceptance by 
throwing himself in humble trust on 
that mercy. In the Epistles of Paul 
accordingly justification acquired a new 
meaning, becoming equivalent to accept- 
ance before God, and the term righteous- 
ness was applied to the merciful acquittal 
of the guilty but penitent offender, 

The clause ἐξ ἔργων νόμου defines an 
acquittal on the merits of the case alone, 
based on a life of holy obedience, while 
διὰ πίστεως “I. Xp. points to faith in 
Christ as the appointed channel of God's 
mercy.—émuorevoapev. Here, as in 
Rom. xiii. 11, this verb denotes the act 
of embracing the faith. Jewish Christians 
had by their conversion declared the 
hopelessness of their position under the 
Law without Christ. Faith in him was 
(they saw) the only means of obtaining 
justification.—8idrt . . . This cl 
corroborates the verdict of conscien d 
experience by the authority of Scripture, 














for it adopts the language of Ps. cxlii, 
(cxliii.) 2, οὐ δικαιωθήσεται ἐνώπιόν σου 
πᾶς Cov, with only some verbal alterations 


suggested by the context of the Epistle. 
As two kinds of justification have been 
mentioned, the clause ἐξ ἔργων νόμου 
is required here to make it clear that 
the justification to which the Psalm refers 
was legal, the words ἐνώπιόν σου are 
dropped as needless in this context, and 
πᾶσα σάρξ is substituted for πᾶς ζῶν in 
order to show that the Psalm referred to 
earthly life. The passage is quoted with 
corresponding verbal changes in Rom. 
iii. 20. 

Ver. 17. εἰ 82... ἁμαρτωλοὶ. The 
last verse arrived at the conclusion that 
Jewish converts by their own act con- 











16-19. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAZ 


καὶ αὐτοὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ, dpa Χριστὸς ἁμαρτίας διάκονος ; μὴ γένοιτο͵ 


18, εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα, ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομῶ, παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν 


συνιστάνω.} 


19. ᾿Εγὼ γὰρ διὰ νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον, ἵνα Θεῷ ζήσω. 


1 συνιστανω NABCDFGP. 


demned themselves to be guilty of a 
brokenlaw. The argument now proceeds 
on this assumption ‘If it be true (as 
has been shown) that we by seeking to be 
justified in Christ were aarti to be our- 
selves also sinners as well as the Gentiles 
—if our sin was then discovered, and it 
be admitted that confession of sin lies 
at the root of all Christian life, what then 
is the attitude of Christ toward sin? ”— 
ἄρα X. a. διάκονος; This clause is 
clearly interrogative, and the true reading 
is Gpa, not apa (inferential). For here, 
aware elsewhere in Pauline language, 
μὴ γένοιτο repudiates a monstrous sug- 

estion, put forward in the form of a 








“question, the mere statement of which is 


΄- 


repugnant to the moral sense. 

It was objected to this doctrine of God’s 
free grace in Christ to guilty sinners 
that it held out a license to sin by doing 
away the wholesome restraints of the 
Law, and so encouraged men to continue 
in sin by its assurance of pardon. The 
fallacy is here dismissed with scorn on 
the strength of the very nature of Christ, 
but is more fully exposed in the sixth 
chapter to the Romans. 

Ver. 18. 
the authority of the Law over Christian 
life, it becomes true that Christ did lead 
me to transgression.” So argues the 
Apostle as he turns to his own life for 
an illustration of the incompatibility of 
allegiance to Christ with the continued 
supremacy of the Law. 

Ver. 19. Ἐγὼ. The stress laid on the 
personal pronoun shows that Paul is here 
referring to the facts of his personal his- 
tory. He singles out his own conversion 
for the sake of the crucial example which 
it afforded of the difficulty of reconciling 
the commands of Christ with the tra- 
ditional law of Israel, for he was actu- 
ally bearing the commission of the high 
priest, and carrying out the orders of the 
Sanhedrim when Christ met him in the 
way and laid His commands upon him. 
He had to choose between the two: and 
at Christ’s word he flung up his office 
and renounced for ever the service of 
the Law.— 8a νόμου: though under 
law. The translation of these words in 
our versions through the law seems to 
me fatal to the sense: for the death to 


‘If, indeed, I do reestablish | 


Law which is here recorded was not due 
to the instrumentality of Law, but 
was the immediate effect of the vision 
and words of Christ; and the express 
object of this reference to the conversion 
of Saul is to show how union with Christ 





cumcision, of uncircumcision, or of law, 
which was subsisting at the time. Saul 


~ was on official duty, surrounded by the 


circumstances and machinery of Law 
when Christ stayed him, and he became 
at once dead to the claim of Law upon 
him. —vép@ ἀπέθανον. These words 
give a vivid description of the spiritual 
revulsion produced by his conversion in 
the heart of Saul. Whereas, hitherto, his 
whole mind had been set on fulfilling the 
whole Law, and he had counted its obli- 
gations all in all to him, he now entirely 
renounced the duty of obedience to its 


commands and repudiated its authority. 


And just as death works a final change, 
and leaves behind an indelible effect, so 
did his conversion affix a permanent 
stamp of lifelong change on all his after 
years: thenceforth he served another 
Master, owned absolute obedience to 
His will, listened for His inward voice 
or outward revelation, and drank of His 
Spirit. 

The absence of the article before νόμῳ 
is noteworthy; whereas the Law of 
Moses, being the one revealed Law, is 
always designated the Law (6 νόμος), 
νόμῳ denotes law in the abstract, so 
that this clause comprehends emancipa- 
tion from all control of externallaw. The 
freedom was, of course, purely spiritual: 
Paul continued fully to acknowledge the 
duty of outward submission to all duly 
ordained authority, but maintained the 
absolute independence of his spirit and 
conscience from its dictates.—iva Θεῷ 
ζήσω. This clause adds the motive for 
this death to Law. It was a veritable 
death unto life: Saul had striven in vain 
to obtain life before God by zealous ful- 
filment of every commandment; he now 
acknowledged his utter failure, surren- 











166 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


II. 20—21. 


20. Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαι: ζῶ δὲ οὐκ ἔτι ἐγὼ, ζῇ δὲ ἐν ἐμοὶ 
Χριστός - ὃ δὲ νῦν ζῶ ἐν σαρκὶ, ἐν πίστει ζῶ τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ,; 


τοῦ ἀγαπήσαντός με καὶ παραδόντος ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ. 


21. οὐκ 


ἀθετῶ τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ: εἰ γὰρ διὰ νόμου δικαιοσύνη, ἄρα 


Χριστὸς δωρεὰν ἀπέθανεν. 


1. viov τ. Θεου NACD°EKLP ; +. Θεου και Χριστου BD!FG. 


fered all the pride and ambition of his 
life, and cast himself in humble trust at 
the feet of Jesus to receive from Him 
that precious life which he had sought 
in vain by his most zealous efforts under 
the Law. 

Ver. 20. Χριστῷ συνεστ. The Greek 
order throws special emphasis on Χριστῷ: 





union with Christ became from that time 
“the central feature of his life; it entailed 





in the beginning a fellowship with his’ 





crucifixion, a real crucifixion of heart 
and will. By this figure he describes 
the intense agony of spiritual conflict, 
the crushing load of shame and bitter 
remorse which he underwent during the 
three days of darkness and silent despair 
that followed his vision of the Christ.—{6@ 
δὲ: And I live. I can perceive no ground 
for rendering δέ nevertheless (A.V.) or yet 
(R.V.). There is no contrast here be- 
tween the life and the previous death: 
on the contrary, the life is presented as 
the direct outcome of the death. As the 
resurrection of Christ was the sequel of 
the crucifixion, so Paul was joined to 
Christ in death that he might be joined 
to Him in spiritual life—ot« én... 
The new life is no longer, like the former, 
dependent on the struggling efforts of a 
mere man to draw near to God in his 
own righteousness. Christ Himself is 
its source, as the vine is the source of 
life to the branches.—8 δὲ ζῶ: But in 
that I live. Our versions make this = 
ἣν ζωὴν ζῶ; but it seems to me more 
accordant with the context and with 
Greek forms of expression to make 6 = 
in that, as it is rendered by A.V. in Rom. 
vi. 10. Two instances of this adverbial 
use of 6 for a connecting particle have 
been already noted in this Epistle (i. 7, 
ii. 10). Paul is here accounting for the 
fact that he now possesses spiritual life, 
though still in the flesh and subject to 
motions of sin in his members: it belongs 
to him in virtue of his faith in the Son 
of God.—pe . .. ἐμοῦ. The previous 
clauses have expressed the intimate per- 
sonal union between the spirit of Paul 
and his Divine Master. In harmony 
with that view an exclusive personal 





aspect is presented of the love of Christ 
and of His sacrifice on the Cross, as 
though Paul himself had been their sole 
object. 

Ver. 21. Christ died in order that men 
might live before God by His grace in 
spite of a broken Law; if men could 
keep the Law of themselves and live, 
there would be no call for grace, and 
the death of Christ would be proved a 
useless sacrifice.—81a νόμου. Law was 
never, like faith, instrumental to justifi- 
cation (cf. ver. 16). Accordingly, Paul 
never speaks of justification through 
Law, but either ἐκ νόμου or ἐν νόμῳ. 
Here, as in ver. 19, διὰ νόμου really 
denotes a legal environment, and the 
verse argues that if righteousness was 
really within men’s reach under a legal 
dispensation, then there was no occasion 
for the death of Christ at all. 

CHAPTER III.—Vv. 1-6. WHAT SENSE- 
LESS FOLLY IS IT FOR YOU, WHO HAD THE 
CRUCIFIXION OF CHRIST SET PLAINLY BE- 
FORE YOUR EYES, TO RESORT NOW TO 
CIRCUMCISION! ‘THINK ONLY HOW IT 
WAS THAT YOU RECEIVED THE SPIRIT: 
WAS IT BY OBEDIENCE TO LAW OR BY 
LISTENING IN FAITH? CAN YOU COM- 
PLETE A SPIRITUAL WORK BY AN ORDI- 
NANCE OF THE FLESH? DID YOU SUFFER 
ALL THAT PERSECUTION FOR NOTHING? 
WAS IT YOUR OBEDIENCE TO LAW OR 
YOUR LISTENING IN FAITH THAT LED TO 
Gop’s IMPARTING TO YOU THE SPIRIT 
WITH POWER, EVEN AS THE FAITH OF 
ABRAHAM WAS RECKONED TO HIM FOR 
RIGHTEOUSNESS ?—Ver. 1. ἐβάσκανεν. 
This word denoted either the fascination 
of an evil eye or some malignant influ- 
ence akin to it; the infatuation of some 
Galatians at this crisis is attributed to the 
baneful effect of some mysterious powers 
of evil. 

The reading ἐβάσκηνεν has probably 
found its way into some MSS. from 
classical usage; most verbs in -aivew 
form the aorist in ἃ in the N.T., e.g., 
λευκᾶναι ἐσήμανεν ποιμάνατε. 

The additions τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι 
after ἐβάσκανεν, and ἐν ὑμῖν after προε- 
γράφη in the Received Text are evidently 








ae 


Ill. r—§. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 167 


III. 1. Ὦ ᾿᾽ἌΝΟΗΤΟΙ Γαλάται, τίς ὑμᾶς ἐβάσκανεν,; οἷς κατ᾽ 
ὀφθαλμοὺς ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη 2 ἐσταυρωμένος ; 2. τοῦτο 
μόνον θέλω μαθεῖν ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν: Ἐξ ἔργων νόμου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐλάβετε, 
ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως ; 2. οὕτως ἀνόητοί ἐστε ; ἐναρξάμενοι πνεύματι, 
νῦν σαρκὶ ἐπιτελεῖσθε; 4. τοσαῦτα ἐπάθετε εἰκῆ ; εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῆ. 
5. ὁ οὖν ἐπιχορηγῶν ὑμῖν τὸ πνεῦμα, καὶ ἐνεργῶν δυνάμεις ἐν ὑμῖν, 


Lrg αληθειᾳ μη πειθεσθαι after εβασκανεν CD9EKLP; om. NABD!FG 17, 67. 


2 ev υμῖν after rpoeypady DEFGKLP; 


spurious. The former is probably due to 
a reminiscence of v. 7, where the clause 
occurs.—mpoeypaddy. This word is twice 
employed by the Apostle, once in Rom. 
xv. 4 with reference to the Scriptures, 
once in Eph, iii. 3 with reference to a 
former letter ofhisown. Here, probably, 
it refers in like manner to some document 
which he had placed in the hands of the 
Galatians, or some letter he had written 
for their guidance during his absence, in 
which the vital truth of the crucifixion 
had been enforced. That he wrote many 
apostolic letters to his converts is clear 
from 2 Thess. iii. 17. The addition κατ᾽ 
ὀφθάλμους is in harmony with this view. 
γράφειν never has the sense of ae 
in the N.T.—éoravpwpévos. The Gree 
order of words indicates that this parti- 
ciple has the force of a predicate. The 
fact of the Crucifixion with all that the 
fact involved was the truth which had 
been so distinctly set before the eyes of 
the Galatians in black and white. 

Ver. 2. The Apostle appeals with 
confidence to the personal experience 
of his converts. They were themselves 
conscious of having received on their 
conversion gifts of the Spirit. Whence 
then came the inward change? Was it 
the result of fulfilling law, ‘or of listening 
in faith? The question needs no answer : 
for it was obviously the result of listening 
in faith, The second clause couples 
together two essential requisites for 
conversion: men must not only listen, 
but listen in a right spirit, desiring to 
know and do God’s will. The genitive 
πίστεως adds this essential condition.— 
τὸ πνεῦμα. The spirit constitutes in this 
Epistle a definite elementinthe regenerate 
nature, due to spiritual creation as the 
flesh is to natural creation—an internal 
organ by which the Holy Spirit operates 
on the will and prompts the action of 
man (cf. v. 16-22). It becomes therefore 
a living human force within the heart, 
distinct from the personality of the Holy 
Spirit. But on the other hand it is 


om. SABC 17, etc. 


absolutely dependent for its vital force 
on the original inspiration of the Holy 
Spirit, and can neither live nor grow 
without continual nourishment and sus- 
tenance from Him. 

Ver. 3. πνεύματι . .. σαρκὶ. These 
two datives denote the two internal 
spheres susceptible of moral influence. 
Conversion had brought about a spiritual 
change as its immediate result: it was 
folly to look for a consummation of this 
change from an ordinance of the flesh 
like circumcision. This was to exalt 
flesh above spirit instead of rising from 
flesh to spirit.—évapyeo Oar and ἐπιτελεῖν 
are coupled together in 2 Cor. viii. 6 and 
Phil. i. 6 to express the beginning and 
consummation of works of mercy and 
sanctification. Greek authors use évdp- 
χεσθαι with reference to the initial cere- 
mony of a sacrifice (Eur., [ph., A. 147, 
435, 955), ἐπιτελεῖν in Heb. ix. 6 refers 
to the performance ofritual. The middle 
voice ἐπιτελεῖσθε is used here because 
the spiritual process is to be wrought by 
them upon themselves. 

Ver. 4. The persecutions endured by 
the Galatian converts had all been due 
to the jealous animosity of the Jews: if 
they were now to accept the Law after 
all, they would proclaim their former 
resistance to have been wanton caprice 
on their part, which had led them to 
provoke persecution to no purpose (εἰκῆ) 
without any sufficient object. 

Ver. 5. ἐπιχορηγῶν. The verb χορη- 
γεῖν acquired its meaning from the 
function of the χορηγός whose duty it 
was to supply the members of his chorus 
with all necessary equipment in the course 
of their training and performance. As 
men took pride in the liberal fulfilment 
of this duty, the word came to denote 
aliberalsupply. The compound émyopy- 
γεῖν denotes apparently an enhancement 
of this bounty (2 Cor. ix. 10).---δυνάμεις. 
This word is sometimes applied in the 
Gospels to visible miracles, but in the 


language of Paul, as elsewhere, it denotes 


168 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATA> ΠῚ. 


ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως ; 6. καθὼς ᾿Αβραὰμ ἐπίστευσε 


τῷ Θεῷ, καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην. 


κετε. ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως, οὗτοί εἰσιν υἱοὶ ᾿Αβραάμ. 8. προϊδοῦσα 


δὲ ἡ γραφὴ ὅτι ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοῖ τὰ ἔθνη ὁ Θεὸς, προευηγγελίσατο 


τῷ ᾿Αβραὰμ, ὅτι Ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. 


9. ὥστε οἱ ἐκ πίστεως εὐλογοῦνται σὺν τῷ πιστῷ ᾿Αβραάμ. 


forces or powers. Here accordingly it 
refers to the supernatural powers imparted 
by the Spirit to Christians. 

Ver. 6. The faith of the Galatians is 
likened to that of Abraham, in that it 
found the same acceptance with God. 

The quotation of Gen, xv. 6 was 
reckoned follows the LXX, whereas our 
version, following the Hebrew text, refers 
to God, he counted it. This passage is 
repeatedly commented on by Philo as well 
asin the N.T. Paul bases his argument 
upon it in Rom. iv. 3 by way of proof 
that God imputes righteousness on the 
ground of faith, not of works, and James 
guards it against misinterpretation by 
teachers who degraded faith into a barren 
assent of the intellect (James ii, 17-23). ° 
Obviously Jewish teachers had already 
concentrated attention on this passage 
on account of the explicit testimony 
which it bears to the faith of Abraham 
and to God’s acceptance of that faith; 
and stress had been laid upon its authority 
in their schools of theology. 

Vv. 7-14. By FairH MEN BECOME 
SONS OF ABRAHAM AND INHERIT HIS 
BLESSING, WHEREAS THOSE WHO CLAIM 
IT ON THE SCORE OF OBEDIENCE TO LAW 
ARE SUBJECT TO THE CURSE OF A BROKEN 
LAW; FROM WHICH CHRIST REDEEMED 
us, GENTILES AS WELL AS JEWS, BY 
BEARING THE CURSE HIMSELF.—Ver. 7. 
Γινώσκετε: Ye perceive. The emphatic 
admonition, Know ye, adopted in our 
versions, would require an aorist impera- 
tive γνῶτε, as in Heb. viii. τι. This 
verse contains a deduction from the 
former, as is suggested by the inferential 
ἄρα. Since faith was the ground of 
Abraham’s justification, it follows that 
those who inherit his faith are his true 
sons.—ot- ἐκ πίστεως, sc. υἱοὶ ὄντες. 
The form of the Greek sentence suggests* 
the insertion of these words to complete 
the ellipsis. With this addition the verse 
carries on the previous argument to its 
natural sequel. The faith of Abraham 
was there declared to be a fundamental 
condition of the divine acceptance. Those 
therefore who inherit his faith are his 
sons indeed and heirs of his blessing. 
The discourse of Christ recorded in the 


10. ὅσοι 


Gospel follows the same line of argument: 
οἰὰ ye were Abraham's children, ye would 

) the works of Abraham (John viii. 39). 
Both alike urge that resemblance in life 
and character is the true test of sonship. 
Gentiles therefore who prove themselves 
sons of Abraham by exhibiting like faith 
are his sons indeed, and inherit the 
blessing promised to his seed. The 
antithesis in ver, 10, ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων νόμον 
εἰσίν, sc. υἱοί, presents a like ellipsis: 
the exclusive claim of Jews to be ss 
of Abraham in virtue of their observan 
of the Law is there disposed of on 
corresponding grounds. 

Ver. 8. δικαιοῖ: justifieth. The 
present tense is used because justification 


by faith, though not revealed to the 


Gentiles till Christ came, was an eternal 
truth of God’s dealings with man, to be 
revealed in due time. There were in 
Genesis anticipations of this truth, and 
Abraham himself, the father of the faith- 
ful, was a kind of firstfruits of the Gentiles 
(Rom. iv. 10-12). The quotation here 
given contains the substance of promises 
recorded in Gen. xii. 3, and xviii. 18 with 
slight verbal alteration. These were an 
earlier Gospel, but not: (as our versions 
intimate) the Gospel. 


Ver. 9. οἱ ἐκ πίστεως. See note on 
ver. 7. 
Ver. το. The Apostle here proceeds 


to deal with the rival claim to a special 
blessing on the score of obedience to Law. 
Jews maintained that their knowledge 
of the Law entitled them to the blessings 
attached to the sons of Abraham. He 
urges on the contrary that this entailed 
on them the curse of a broken Law: 
for no flesh could keep the whole Law 
(cf. ii. 16). The failure of men to satisfy 
the requirements of the Law is not limited 
to the Mosaic Law, but is incidental 
to the idea of righteous Law in the 
abstract. Hence the expression νόμου 
rather than rot vépov. The Roman 
Epistle accordingly pronounces sentence 
of guilt on the Gentile as well as the 
Jewish world for breach of the Laws of 
natural or revealed religion. Here, how- 
ever, the object is to meet claims founded 
on the Mosaic Law, so the curses of that 


7. ywoo-. 














————E— inn 


6—14. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


4 


γὰρ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου εἰσὶν, ὑπὸ κατάραν εἰσί γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι} 


Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς γεγραμ- 


μένοις ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τοῦ νόμου, τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά. 


II, ὅτι 


δὲ ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ, δῆλον - ὅτι Ὁ δίκαιος 


ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται" 12. 6 δὲ νόμος οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ πίστεως, ἀλλ᾽ 


Ὁ ποιήσας αὐτὰ" ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς. 


13. Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς 


ἐξηγόρασεν ἐκ τῆς κατάρας τοῦ νόμου, γενόμενος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν κα- 
τάρα " (γέγραπται γὰρ, Ἐπικατάρατος πᾶς ὃ κρεμάμενος 
ἐπὶ ξύλου") 14. ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ εὐλογία τοῦ ᾿Αβραὰμ γένηται 


1 ότι NABCDEFGP 17, etc.; om. KL. 
2 avOpwmos after avra D°EKIy; om. SABCD!FGP 17, etc. 


Law are adduced in support of the 
argument. The imprecation here given 
is not a verbal quotation, but reproduces 
in substance the series of curses pro- 
nounced from Mount Ebal (Deut. xxvii. 
15-26), summing them up in a single 
sentence. 

Vv. 11,12. The failure of the Law to 
justify is further established by a com- 
parison of Habakkuk ii. 4 with Lev. 
xviii. 5: the latter embodies the spirit 
of the Law: for it demands obedience 
as a necessary condition antecedent to 
the gift of life from God (cf. Rom. x. 5). 
The prophet on the contrary makes life 
dependent upon faith. By thus substi- 
tuting faith for obedience he virtually 
supersedes the existing Law, and estab- 
ται a new criterion, which takes 
account of the state of heart instead of 
the outward life (cf. Rom. i. 17). The 
same passage is adduced in Heb, x. 38 
in proof of the vital importance of faith. 
All three writers agree in basing true 
religion upon heartfelt trust in God: but 
whereas the Epistle to the Hebrews 
regards faith from the same standpoint 
as the Hebrew prophet, and identifies 
it with the steadfast loyalty to an unseen 
God which supports the believer under 
manifold trials, Paul here limits his view 
to the faith which prompts the convert 
to embrace Christ. Regarding it there- 
fore from a purely Christian standpoint, 
he embodies in his conception the new 
revelation of the Father’s character made 
in Christ. The faith which he has in 
mind is justifying faith, the faith in God’s 
pitying love which assures a repentant 
sinner of forgiveness and merciful accept- 
ance in spite of a guilty past. 

Ver. 13. The Law pronounced a 
blessing and a curse; but since it made 
no allowance for human infirmity, the 
blessing proved barren in result; while 


the curse, which invoked the just wrath 
of an offended God for the punishment 
of the guilty, proved, on the contrary, 
fruitful in condemnation. 

From this hopeless state of just con- 
demnation Christ delivered us by reveal- 
ing the infinite mercy of an Almighty 
Father, and so reviving hope and thank- 
ful love in the heart of the condemned 
sinner by faith in His love.—étnydpacev. 
The figure of a ransom, which this word 
conveys, is doubly appropriate in this 
connection. Men needed a ransom, for 
the Law had left them prisoners under 
sentence of death, and Christ had Him- 
self to pay the price. He had to become 
a man like His brethren save in sin, and 
to endure the penalty denounced on male- 
factors and hang on the accursed cross, 
as if He had been guilty like them.—yevé- 
μενος κατάρα. Hebrew thought tended 
to identify the man on whom a curse 
was laid with the curse, as it identified 
the sin-offering with the sin, calling it 
ἁμαρτία (Lev. iv. 21-25). Hence the 
scapegoat was regarded as utterly un- 
clean by reason of the sins laid upon it. 
- Ἐπικατάρατος ... This passage is 
quoted from Deut. xxi. 23 with one 
significant alteration. In the original 
the criminal executed under sentence of 
the Law is pronounced κεκαταραμένος 
ὑπὸ Θεοῦ, so that the Law is affirmed to 
be the voice of God, carrying with it the 
fulness of divine sanction. But here the 
words ὑπὸ Θεοῦ are omitted, inasmuch 
as the new revelation of God’s mercy in 
Christ has superseded for Christians the 
previous condemnation of the Law. 

The original passage refers to criminals 
executed under the Jewish Law, and 
commands the speedy burial of their 
dead bodies before sunset in opposition 
to the vindictive practices prevailing in 
Palestine among the surrounding nations 


170 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


Ill 


ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ἵνα τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τοῦ πνεύματος λάβωμεν διὰ 


τῆς πίστεως. 


κεκυρωμένην διαθήκην οὐδεὶς ἀθετεῖ ἢ ἐπιδιατάσσεται. 


15. ᾿Αδελφοὶ, κατὰ ἄνθρωπον λέγω, ὅμως ἀνθρώπου 


16. τῷ δὲ 


᾿Αβραὰμ ἐῤῥέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι, καὶ τῷ σπέρματι αὐτοῦ - οὐ 
λέγει, ‘Kal τοῖς σπέρμασιν,᾽ ὡς ἐπὶ πολλῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐφ᾽ ἑνὸς, Καὶ 


of nailing up unburied bodies in public 
places (cf. 1 Sam. xxxi. 10, 2 Sam. 
xxi. ro). It made, of course, no refer- 
ence to crucifixion, which was a Roman 
mode of execution, not a Jewish. 

Ver. 14. tva ... twa... Two 
λοι purposes of the Redeemer are 

ere coupled together: (1) the extension 
of the blessing to Gentiles as well as Jews; 
(2) the outpouring of the Spirit upon those 
that embraced the faith of Christ. 

Vv. 15-18, GopD’s WORD WAS PLIGHTED 
TO ABRAHAM THAT HE WOULD BESTOW 
THE INHERITANCE ON HIS SEED (NOT ON 
ALL HIS DESCENDANTS, BUT ON ONE 
PARTICULAR SEED), AND COULD NOT 
THEREFORE BE SET ASIDE BY SUBSE- 
QUENT STIPULATIONS IN THE LAw.— 
Ver.15. κ᾿ ἄνθρωπον λέγω. This preface 
indicates that the argument which it in- 
troduces is founded on the principles of 
human law and custom.—8.a6ynnv. The 
meaning testament affixed to this word 
in classical Greek belongs to the Greek 
practice of testamentary disposition, other 
covenants being designated by συνθήκη, 
etc. But no such law or custom existed 
among the ancient Hebrews, so the LXX 
employed the word to express the Hebrew 
conception of a covenant between God 
and His people. As this was the outcome 
of God’s sovereign grace and bounty, and 
not a matter of mutual arrangement, it 
could hardly be described by any of the 
Greek terms for covenant; it was, on the 
other hand, analogous to a disposition 
of property by testament, and was accor- 
dingly designated by the term διαθήκη. 
Thence it was extended also to covenants 
between man and man inthe LXX. The 
same sense of covenant is attached to the 
word apparently throughout the N.T. 
Here, at all events, the distinct refer- 
ence to the covenant with Abraham 
leaves no doubt of its meaning.—-dpws 
ἀνθρώπου. This phrase (= καΐπερ ἀν- 
θρώπου οὖσαν ὅμως) intimates that even 
men are bound by a contract duly rati- 
fied: a fortiori, God is bound by His 
plighted word. Two distinct methods of 
superseding a contract are suggested by 
ἀθετεῖ and ἐπιδιατάσσεται : it might be 
expressly annulled, or it might be over- 
laid by new stipulations. 


Ver. 16. The clause καὶ τῷ σπέρματι 
αὐτοῦ is quoted from God’s promises to 
Abraham in Gen. xiii. 15 and xvii. 8 with 
only the necessary change of the second 
person gov into αὐτοῦ. The original 
promise was limited to the possession of 
the promised land, but was coupled with 
a perpetual covenant between God and 
the seed of Abraham: I will be their God, 
Thou shalt keep my covenant, thou and 
thy seed after thee in their generations. 
Hence Hebrew prophecy imported into 
it the idea of a spiritual inheritance, and 
the Epistle adopts this interpretation with- 
out hesitation.—od λέγει, sc: 6 Θεός. As 
the clause in question was quoted from an 
utterance of God, it was not necessary to 
specify the subject of λέγει.---καὶ τοῖς 
onéppacw : And to his seeds, i.e., families, 
This contrast between the many families 
and the one chosen family is more than 
mere verbal criticism: it contains the 
germ of that doctrine of continuous 
divine election within the stock of Abra- 
ham which is developed in the ninth 
chapter of the Epistle to the Romans. 
For Abraham had many children after 
the flesh; and the exclusion of Ishmael, 
Dedan, Midian, Esau in _ patriarchal 
times in favour of Isaac and of Jacob 
established the principle which culmin- 
ated in the rejection of the Jewish nation 
in favour of Christ. This conception of 
a continuous holy family linking Christ 
with Abraham runs through the next 
section of the Epistle; just as πολλῶν 
and ἑνός here mean π᾿ σπερμάτων and 
ἑ. σπέρματος, so ἑνός in ver. 20 means 
ἑνὸς σπέρματος and τὰ πάντα in ver. 22 
τὰ πάντα σπέρματα. In like manner 
Christ is contemplated, not by Himself 
alone as constituting in the unity of His 
person the chosen seed, but as a new 
centre out of whom the family of God 
branched forth afresh. He became in a 
far higher sense than Isaac or Jacob a 
new head of the chosen family: for all 
Abraham’s children after the flesh that 
received Him not were shut out from the 
blessing, while all who believed in Him 
became by faith sons of Abraham and 
members of the true family of God. The 
whole Church of Christ are in short 
regarded as one with Christ—one in life 











- τ- —~——__ > nn  κκκἧ---. -ὦ .... -. 


{5—I9. 


τῷ σπέρματί σου, ὅς ἐστι Χριστός. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


171 
17. τοῦτο δὲ λέγω, διαθήκην 


προκεκυρωμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁ μετὰ ἔτη τετρακόσια καὶ τριάκοντα 
γεγονὼς νόμος οὐκ ἀκυροῖ, εἰς τὸ καταργῆσαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν. 18. 
εἰ γὰρ ἐκ νόμου ἡ κληρονομία, οὐκ ἔτι ἐξ ἐπαγγελίας - τῷ δὲ ᾿Αβραὰμ 


δι᾿ ἐπαγγελίας κεχάρισται ὁ Θεός. 


19. Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος ; τῶν παρα- 


βάσεων χάριν προσετέθη,2 ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται, 


εις Χριστον after Θεον DEFGKL; om. ΦΑΒΟΡ 17, etc, 
2 προσετεθη KABD°EKL ; ercéy D!FG 71, ete. 


and spirit, for they are members of His 
body and partake of His spirit (cf. wv. 
28, 29). 

Vener, 18. The inviolate sanctity of 
God’s earlier covenant in presence of the 
subsequent promulgation of the Law is 
here affirmed in virtue of the principle 
established in ver. 15. Had the inherit- 
ance been made contingent on obedience 
to Law, the previous promise would have 
been thereby invalidated. 

The Received Text inserts εἰς Χριστόν 
after Θεοῦ. The words appear from the 
MS. evidence to be a later addition to the 
text, suggested probably by the previous 
argument, which associated the promise 
to Abraham with the coming of Christ, 
in whom alone that promise finds its 
fulfilment. The very form of the sentence 
forbids the acceptance of the addition 
here: for διαθήκην in the absence of an 
article does not denote the particular 
covenant concluded with Abraham, but 
signifies any covenant in the abstract, 
if duly ratified by God, whatever its 
nature.—8.’ éwayy. κεχάρισται. The 
full bearing of the language on the 
argument can hardly be expressed in 
English without a paraphrase. χαρίζεσθαι 
denotes not merely a gift, but a free gift 
bestowed by the grace of God without 
reserve, and ἐπαγγελία marks the promise 
as a spontaneous offer, and not an under- 
taking (ὑπόσχεσις) based on terms of 
mutual agreement. 

Vv. 19-22. THe Law waAS A TEM- 
PORARY ENACTMENT ORDAINED TO DEAL 
WITH THE OFFENCES WHICH IT DE- 


-NOUNCES UNTIL THE COMING OF THE 


PROMISED SEED. THE GOD FROM WHOM 
IT PROCEEDED WAS THE GOD OF ABRA- 
HAM, BUT HE PROMULGATED IT THROUGH 
ANGELS AND AN APPOINTED MEDIATOR TO 
ALL THE CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM AFTER 
THE FLESH, NOT TOTHE ONE CHOSEN SEED. 
Dip IT THEN CONTRAVENE HIS PROMISES? 
NAY VERILY. IF INDEED IT HAD BEEN 
CAPABLE OF QUICKENING LIFE, IT WOULD 
HAVE PROVIDED NEW MEANS OF JUSTIFI- 


CATION: BUT WHAT IT REALLY DID WAS 
TO CONVICT ALL ALIKE OF SIN, THAT 
THE PROMISE MIGHT BE GIVEN TO THOSE 
WHO BELIEVE ON FAITH IN CHRIST. 
--Τί οὖν ὁ vépos. What function then 
had the Law, if it had absolutely no 
effect on God’s previous covenant with 
Abraham? — τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν. 
Our versions render this because of 
transgressions, ignoring the Greek article, 
But there could obviously be no trans- 
gressions until the Law existed, however 
grievous the moral degradation. The 
real meaning is that it was added with 
a view to the offences which it specifies, 
thereby pronouncing them to be from that 
time forward transgressions of the Law. 
Its design is gathered in short from its 
contents. The prohibitions of the Ten 
Commandments reveal their own purpose: 
they were enacted in order to repress the 
worship of false gods, idolatry, blasphemy, 
Sabbath breaking, disobedience to parents, 
murder, adultery, theft, false witness, 
covetousness. These sins prevailed be- 
fore the Law, but by pronouncing them 
to be definite transgressions it called in 
the fear of God’s wrath to reinforce the 
weakness of the moral sense and educate 
man’s conscience. The same aspect of 
the Law is forcibly presented in 1 Tim. 
i. 9. Law is not made for a righteous 
man, but for the lawless and unruly... . 
Attention is in both concentrated on the 
moral Law to the exclusion of the sacri- 
ficial and ceremonial.—aypis ot. The 
alternative reading ἄχρις ἄν does not 
affect the sense. It is assumed on the 
strength of previous argument that the 
dispensation of the Law came to an end 
with the coming of Christ. By the gift 
of an indwelling spirit He emancipated 
His faithful disciples from allegiance to 
an outward Law.—émyyyeArar: He (i.¢., 
God) hath promised (cf. Rom. iv. 21, 
Heb. xii. 26). ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι never has 
a passive sense in the N.T.—8.atayeis 
δι’ ἀγγέλων. The N.T. refers three 
times to the interposition of angels in 


172 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


ΠῚ, 


διαταγεὶς δι᾿ ἀγγέλων, ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου - 20. ὃ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ 


ἔστιν, ὃ δὲ Θεὸς εἷς ἐστίν. 
τοῦ Θεοῦ ; μὴ γένοιτο. 


21. Ὁ οὖν νόμος κατὰ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν 
εἰ γὰρ ἐδόθη νόμος ὁ δυνάμενος ζωοποιῆσαι, 


σου Θεον NACDEKLP ; Θεου FG; om. Β. 


the promulgation of the Law: God’s 
intercourse with Moses through the angel 
of His presence was evidently a common 
topic in Jewish schools of theology. In 
Acts vii. 53 the fact is recorded by way of 
enhancing the authority of the Law; in 
Heb. ii. 2 it is contrasted with God’s reve- 
lation in His Son: here it is contrasted 
with God’s more familiar intercourse 
with Abraham. He drew nigh to God, 
and was called the friend of God: but 
at Sinai the people stood far off, and the 
Law was made known through the double 
intervention of angels and of a human 
mediator.—év χειρὶ μεσίτου. The term 

εσίτης was applied with the utmost 
atitude to any intermediate between two 
parties, whether it was the one great 
Mediator between God and man or any 
of the subordinate servants of God 
through whom He makes known His will 
to men or exercises His authority. The 
phrase ἐν χειρί defines its meaning here, 
for it implies that Moses was put in charge 
of the promulgation of the Law (ef. 
Numb. iv. 28, 37 in LXX), and was 
God’s appointed agent for the purpose. 
This interposition of a mediator between 
God and the people was a marked feature 
of distinction between the Sinaitic and 
the patriarchal dispensation. 

Ver. 20. The rendering of the first 
clause in our versions, Now a mediator 
is not a mediator of one, reduces it to an 
unmeaning truism. The author is not 
treating of mediators in the abstract, but 
writes of Moses the mediator of the Law 
that he was not mediator of one chosen 
family ; and so contrasts God’s revelation 
through him with the previous covenant. 
That covenant had been made with Abra- 
ham in person, and embraced a single 
chosen family (cf. ver. 16) restricted from 
generation to generation by continuous 
selection of God’s elect until it centred in 
Christ Himself. Not so the covenant of 
Sinai: it was addressed, not to one family 
(ἑνὸς, sc. σπέρματος), but to many families 
of Abraham’s children after the flesh. 
This change of recipients involved a vital 
change in the revelation also: whereas 
the promise had quickened faith by an 
appeal to gratitude and love, the Law 
used threats of wrath and punishment to 
deter corrupt and carnal natures from 
indulging the vices of the flesh. 


The stress laid on the unity of the 
chosen seed in ver. 16 and the ellipsis of 
σπέρματα with ra πάντα in ver. 22 justify 
us in understanding σπέρματος here with 
ἑνός.--ὁ δὲ Θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν. The recur- 
rence of the same phrase εἷς 6 Θεός with 
a corresponding force in Rom. iii. 30 
suggests its true force and connection 
with the context in this place. The 
Apostle is there urging the real harmony 
of God’s dealings with Jews and Gentiles, 
however different the method employed 
for justifying the two severally; and 
argues that it is nevertheless one and 
the same God who will justify both. 
So here after differentiating the revelation 
made through Moses from that to Abra- 
ham, he is careful to add that the God 
of Sinai is one with the God of Abraham, 
however distinct might be the two revela- 
tions. The true force of the clause may 
be expressed as follows, but the God (sc. 
the God of Sinai) is one with the God of 
promise. The twofold revelation of the 
name of God to Moses as the God of 
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and as the 
eternal God I am that I am, suggests 
the same thought of the divine unity in 
spite of the various aspects in which 
God reveals Himself to successive genera- 
tions of men. 

Ver. 21. In view of the continuity of 
divine providence the suggestion that the 
Law contravened or nullified the previous 
covenant of God with Abraham and the 
patriarchs is dismissed as monstrous. It 
was incompatible with the faithfulness of 
God to His pledged word, and is therefore 
repudiated with the customary formula μὴ 
γένοιτο. The apparent sanction given 
by the Law to a new method of justifica- 
tion (viz., by works) could lead to no 
actual result, unless it had at the same 
time possessed the power which it lacked 
of quickening spiritual life-—rod Θεοῦ. 
These words are omitted in some MSS., 
but the preponderance of authority is in 
favour of their retention. The sense is 
the same whether they be expressed or 
understood. The addition may perhaps 
be due to a marginal comment which 
found its way into the text. 

Ver. 22. The real function of the Law 
was not to justify but to convict of sin, 
that men might the more readily turn in 
humble faith to Christ for relief from the 


AP κύνα, Gs ~ των ο 
μόδον aaa Bi on alia eee 





Oe es” My κα 


a 
= 








------ ..-. -..-..... ο-ὲ- 


20---24. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


173 


ὄντως ἐκ νόμου ἦν dv! ἡ δικαιοσύνη - 22. ἀλλὰ συνέκλεισεν ἧ γραφὴ 


τὰ πάντα ὑπὸ ἁμαρτίαν, ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ 


δοθῇ τοῖς πιστεύουσι. 


23. Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν, ὑπὸ νόμον 


ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι 2 εἰς τὴν μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφ- 
θῆναι" 24. ὥστε ὃ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστὸν, ἵνα 


lex νομου ἣν av SABC 3, εἴς. ; om. nv αν FG; αν ex νομου ny DSEKLP. 


2 συνκλειομενοι SABD!FGP 17, etc. ; 


burden of an accusing conscience.—j 
γραφὴ. The Old Testament was always 
designated by the plural γραφαί in apo- 
stolic times, for the several books were 
preserved in separate rolls and did not 
form a single whole. Here, therefore, ἢ 
γραφή points to some particular passage 
of the Law to which the author has already 
drawn attention as embodying its spirit. 
The passage of Deut. xxvii. 26 quoted in 
ver. 10 answers this description, for it 
imprecates a curse on all who fell short 
of perfect obedience.—ovvéxleroev . . . 
τὰ πάντα. The figure here presented of 
prisoners under sentence, condemned to 
pay the penalty of sin, makes it clear that 
the object of συνέκλεισεν is persons, not 
things: and accordingly these prisoners 
are described in ver. 23 as συγκλειόμενοι 
(masc.). A neuter plural substantive 
must therefore be understood with ra 
πάντα which is applicable to persons. 
Hence I infer that by τὰ πάντα is meant 
τὰ πάντα σπέρματα, i.c., all the families 
of Abraham after the flesh, in other words 
the whole Jewish nation.—iva... The 
design of the Law was to pave the way 
for the eventual fulfilment of the promise 
to all that believe by faith in Christ. 

Vv. 23, 24. THE POSITION OF THE 
TRUE CHILDREN OF GOD BEFORE THE 
COMING OF CHRIST IS ILLUSTRATED BY 
THE CONTROL EXERCISED OVER CHILDREN 
IN THEIR FATHER’S HOUSE BY MEMBERS 
OF HIS HOUSEHOLD. These verses ex- 
plain the position of the faithful under 
the Law. They are here associated with 
Christians by the use of the first person 
plural ; for they too were in their genera- 
tion believers in God, they belonged to 
the same blessed family and inherited 
the original promise. Yet since all Israel 
from the time of Moses to the Advent 
were subjected to the control of the Law, 
they too were subject to bondage. But 
this was really due to the watchful love 
of their Heavenly Father, who thus pro- 
vided needful shelter and guidance, just 
as an earthly father places his young 
children during years of weakness and 
inexperience ynder the charge of house- 


συνκεκλεισμενοι CD9EKL, 


hold servants.—riv πίστιν. The article, 
though ignored in our versions, is essen- 
tial to the sense. By the coming of the 
faith is meant the historic fact of the 
Christian religion, the spread of the Gos- 
pel on earth. The term has the same 
objective sense as in i. 23, iii. 25, Acts 
vi. 7,and Rom. iii. 30, where also a clear 
distinction is drawn between πίστεως, 
faith in the abstract, and τῆς πίστεως, 
the faith of Christ. Obviously faith did 
not come with Christ, it was the most 
conspicuous virtue of the Jewish Church, 
and Abraham was but the first of many 
splendid examples of it.—ovyxAerdpevor. 
MS. authority is strongly in favour of the 
present participle, which is also more 
appropriate than the perfect συγκε- 
κλεισμένοι for describing the continuous 
process of legal condemnation which pre- 
vailed from generation to generation.— 
παιδαγωγὸς. No English equivalent for 
this term can convey its real force, for it 
has no exact counterpart in an English 
home. The position of a nurse towards 
young children approaches more nearly 
than that of schoolmaster or tutor to 
the office of the παιδαγωγός, for he was 
a confidential dependent, usually a slave, 
neither qualified to instruct, nor invested 
with authority to control his young 
master, but appointed to attend on him, 
to safeguard him, and to report to his 
father any disorderly or immoral habits 
on which it might be necessary for the 
father to place a check. The Law in 
like manner regulated outward habits, 
enforced order and decency, and main- 
tained a certain standard of morality 
among Israelites until in due time they 
became ripe for spiritual freedom. It was 
not the function of the Law to address 
itself directly to the conscience like the 
Prophets, or to claim spiritual authority 
over the whole man, but to impose a 
check on the open tyranny of evil, to 
enforce on the community a higher 
standard of morals, and so to foster 
indirectly the growth of spiritual life. 
Vv. 25-29. BuT NOW WE ARE NO 
LONGER CHILDREN, YE ARE ALL SONS 


174 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAZ 


Tih. 


ἐκ πίστεως δικαιωθῶμεν - 25. ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως, οὐκ ἔτι ὑπὸ 


παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν. 


26. πάντες γὰρ υἱοὶ Θεοῦ ἐστὲ διὰ τῆς πίστεως 


ἐν Χριστῷ “Inco: 27. ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε,. Χριστὸν 


ἐνεδύσασθε. 


28. οὐκ ἔνι ᾿Ιουδαῖος, οὐδὲ Ἕλλην - οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος, 


οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος - οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ - πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστὲ 


oF Gop: AT YOUR BAPTISM YE PUT ON 
CHRIST, AND WERE INVESTED WITH 
SPIRITUAL MANHOOD: ALL PREVIOUS 
DISTINCTIONS OF CREED OR RACE, OF 
POSITION OR NATURE, WERE DONE AWAY: 
YE ARE ALL ONE IN CurIsT.—The sudden 
change from the first to the second 
person plural betokens an extension in 
the point of view from Israel to the 
Gentile world. The Epistle has been 
dealing since iii. 17 with the position 
of Israelites under the Law before the 
Advent of the Christ. But that event 
brought Gentiles also within the scope 
of God’s revealed promises and of His 
blessings in Christ. So the Apostle 
turns to his converts, largely enlisted out 
of Gentiles, with the assurance, ‘* Ye are 
all sons of God, whatever your ante- 
cedents”’. Their adoption is assumed, as 
their possession of the gifts of the Spirit 
is assumed iniii.2. The spirit of adoption, 
of which they were conscious within their 


hearts, assured them that they were sons. 


of God (cf. Rom. viii. 15, 16). 

Ver 27. ἐνεδύσασθε. The conception 
of spiritual manhood is here associated 
with baptism by a figure borrowed from 
Greek and Roman usage. At a certain 
age the Roman youth exchanged the 
toga praetexta for the toga virilis and 
passed into the rank of citizens. So 
the Christian had been invested at his 
baptism with the robe of spiritual man- 
hood. Whereas he had before been under 
the control of rules and regulations, like 
a child in his father’s house, he possessed 
now the independence of a grown up son. 
This figure of clothing is applied in 
various ways in Scripture: the effects 
of death and resurrection are described 
in 2 Cor. v. 4 by the figure of unclothing 
and reclothing : the figures of putting on 
Christ and putting on armour are used 
in Rom. ΧΙ, 12, 14, Eph. vi. 11 to 
express the new life support and strength 
required for our Christian warfare. The 
exact force of the figure depends in every 
case upon the context. Here the author 
evidently has in mind the change of 
dress which marked the transition from 
boyhood to manhood. Greeks and 
Romans made much of this occasion and 
celebrated the investment of a youth 


with man’s dress by family gatherings 
and religious rites. The youth, hitherto 
subject to domestic rule, was then ad- 
mitted to the rights and responsibilities 
of a citizen, and took his place beside 
his father in the councils of the family. 

Baptism is in fact likened to a spiritual 
coming of age: the convert, who had 
hitherto been bound to obey definite 
commandments and fulfil definite duties, 
was now set free to learn God’s will 
from the inward voice of the Spirit, 
and discharge the heavier obligations 
incumbent on a citizen of the heavenly 
commonwealth under the guidance of 
an enlightened conscience. He had 
entered on his spiritual manhood, and 
was accordingly emancipated from his 
earlier bondage to an outward Law. 

There is an obvious correspondence 
between this figure of putting on Christ 
at baptism, and the ceremony which 
prevailed throughout the Church in sub- 
sequent centuries of investing catechu- 
mens with white robes on the occasion 
of their baptism. Both give expression 
to a kindred thought: some of the 
Fathers associate them together, and 
perhaps the language of the Apostle 
contributed to the spread of the cere- 
monial. The symbolism however differed 
materially: the white robes corresponded 
rather to the wedding garment in the 
parable: they were an emblem of purity 
and signified the cleansing effect of 
baptism, whereas the context of the 
Epistle points to enfranchisement and 
emancipation from control. 

Ver. 28. Having now established the 
temporary and subordinate function of 
the Law, the Apostle finally repudiates 
every claim, whether on that or any 
other ground, on behalf of any distinct 
class to superior sanctity in Christ. All 
Christians, whatever their antecedents, 
are one in Christ.—ot« ἔνι. Distinctions 
of creed or race are incompatible with 
true membership of Christ: the legal 
barriers and social cleft which severed 
freeman from slave, even natural divisions 
as deep-seated as those of sex, disappear 
in presence of the all-absorbing unity of 
the body of Christ. ἔνι 15 a strengthened 
form of ἐν used for ἔνεστιν, as πάρα, πέρι; 








25--20. IV. 1—3. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


175 


ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ - 29. εἰ δὲ ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ, dpa τοῦ ᾿Αβραὰμ σπέρμα 


ἐστὲ,1 κατ᾽ ἐπαγγελίαν κληρονόμοι. 


IV. 1. λέγω 82, ἘΦ ὅϑων 


χρόνον ὁ κληρονόμος νήπιός ἐστιν, οὐδὲν διαφέρει δούλου, κύριος 
πάντων ὦν" 2. ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ ἐπιτρόπους ἐστὶ καὶ οἰκονόμους, ἄχρι τῆς 
προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός. 3. οὕτω καὶ ἡμεῖς, ὅτε ἦμεν νήπιοι ὑπὸ τὰ 


leore και FGKLP; om. και SABCDE 17, etc. 


μέτα are for πάρεστιν, περιέστιν, μέτεσ- 
τιν.---μεῖς. Special stress is laid on this 
pronoun by its insertion with πάντες: 
the Galatians were themselves a signal 
instance of the power of the Gospel to 
make men one in Christ: for their 
Churches were gathered out of the most 
diverse elements: Jew and Gentile, slave 
and freeman, male and female, had all 
contributed to their composition. 

Ver. 29. ὑμεῖς. The emphatic in- 
sertion of ὑμεῖς before Χριστοῦ in pre- 
ference to Χριστοῦ ἐστέ lays stress 
apparently on the wonderful transforma- 
tion of men who had been aliens from 
the people of God into members of 
Christ. 

CHAPTER IV.—Vv. 1-7. THERE WERE 
IN THE GENTILE WORLD ALSO BEFORE 
CHRIST CHILDREN OF GoD IN BONDAGE 


“TO HUMAN RULE, THAT KNEW NOT THE 


UNSEEN FATHER IN HEAVEN WHO WAS 
ORDERING THEIR LIVES. THEY WERE 
LIKE ORPHAN CHILDREN, WHOM A DE- 
PARTED FATHER HAS WITH LOVING CARE 
CONSIGNED DURING CHILDHOOD TO THE 
CHARGE OF GUARDIANS AND STEWARDS. 
IN DUE TIME, HOWEVER, GOD SENT 
FORTH His SON TO REDEEM THEM ALSO 
FROM BONDAGE, AND HAS MADE US SONS 


_ AND HEIRS, SENDING FORTH THE SPIRIT 


ΟΕ His Son INTO OUR HEARTS,—In 
dealing with the relation of the Mosaic 
Law to the antecedent covenant and 
with its subsequent fulfilment in Christ, 
the Apostle necessarily limited his view 
of the seed of Abraham, who were cove- 
nanted heirs of salvation between Moses 
and the Advent, to Israel. He likened 
these accordingly to children growing 
up in their father’s house under domestic 
control. But as most of those to whom 
he wrote had been converts from heathen- 
ism, he now extends his view of the world 
before Christ so as to embrace Gentiles 
also within its scope. Amidst the heathen 
were other children of God, a faithful seed, 
potential heirs of salvation, who passed 
through a like stage of spiritual childhood 
under different conditions. They were 
like orphan children committed by the 
watchful care of an unseen and un- 


known father to the custody of others. 
For they were subject to human systems 
of religion, government and law, neither 
knowing their Heavenly Father nor com- 
prehending His love for them. The con- 
ception of a dead father providing by his 
will for the due education of his orphan 
children serves admirably to illustrate the 
mutual relations between God and the 
Gentile world, and to set forth the com- 
bination of steadfast love on one side 
with utter ignorance on the other. The 
illustration is obviously borrowed from 
testamentary systems prevailing among 
Greeks and Romans (not among He- 
brews) which enabled a father to appoint 
guardians for his orphan children dur- 
ing their minority. These testamentary 
powers differed considerably in different 
parts of the Roman world according to 
the municipal laws of various cities. 
Whereas Roman citizens became wards 
of the state at fourteen, so that the 
powers of testamentary guardians were 
strictly limited, the discretion of the 
father was allowed a wider range in 
Greek cities. At Athens, for instance, 
the guardians of Demosthenes retained 
control over his property till he became 
a full citizen after eighteen; and in 
Asiatic Greece the custody of property 
was sometimes prolonged to twenty-five, 
though the personal authority ceased at 
fourteen. The dependent position of an 
orphan is described in popular language 
without legal precision; νήπιος is not a 
legal term, but an appropriate description 
for a child of tender years, naturally sub- 
ject to the control of guardians (ἐπιτρό- 
πους) and subordinate agents whom they 
might employ for household management 
or care of property (οἰκονόμους). It can 
hardly be right to identify the latter with 
the Roman curatores, for the special 
function of these officers was custody 
of property and not personal. 

Ver. 3. νήπιοι: children, i.e., spirit- 
ually children. The clause points to 
the stage of undeveloped spiritual life 
through which converts from heathenism 
had passed, the spiritual childhood which 
had been the lot of earlier generations be- 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


IV, 


στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου ἦμεν δεδουλωμένοι - 4. ὅτε δὲ ἦλθε τὸ πλήρωμα 
τοῦ χρόνου, ἐξαπέστειλεν 6 Θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὑτοῦ, γενόμενον ἐκ γυναι- 
Kos, γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον, 5. ἵνα τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ, ἵνα τὴν 


υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν. 


6. ὅτι δέ ἐστε υἱοὶ, ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸ 


πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὑτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν, κράζον, ᾿Αββᾶ, 6 


πατήρ. 


7. ὥστε οὐκ ἔτι εἶ δοῦλος, ἀλλ᾽ υἱός - εἰ δὲ υἱὸς, καὶ 


κληρονόμος διὰ Θεοῦ. 8. ᾿Αλλὰ τότε μὲν, οὐκ εἰδότες Θεὸν, ἔδου- 


μων SABCD!FGP; vpov D°EKL. 
2$ta Geov HABC! 17; δια Geov FG; Θεον δια Χριστου ScC*7DEKLP. 


fore the time was ripe for the Advent.— 
στοιχεῖα. The association of this word 
with νήπιοι fixes on it the conception of 
a rudimentary training to which the world 
was subjected during its spiritual infancy 
by way of preparation for the Gospel of 
Christ and the dispensation of the Spirit. 
Before men could enter into the spirit 
of His teaching, they had to learn the 
elementary principles of religion and mo- 
rality. Compulsory obedience to definite 
rules of justice and order was a necessary 
preparation for the freedom of the Spirit. 
This preliminary education was given to 
the Hebrews in the Ten Commandments 
and the Law, it was imparted to a wider 
world in Greek civilisation and philo- 
sophy, in Roman law and government, 
and in other forms of national and social 
life. These rudiments are disparaged in 
ver. 9 as weak and beggarly in compari- 
son with the teaching of the Spirit, for 
Christian men ought to have outgrown 
their spiritual childhood. So, again, in 
Col. ii. 8, 20, they are condemned 
wherever their traditional hold on hu- 
man society produces an antagonism to 
the higher teaching of Christ. But before 
the Advent they formed a valuable dis- 
cipline for the education of the world. 
Ver. 4. When God saw that the world 
was ripe for the Advent, He sent forth 
His Son. Until generations of mankind 
had learnt through years of social training 
to control some of the animal instincts 
of their lower nature, to rebel against 
its brutal passions, and cherish a desire 
to live in obedience to their higher nature, 
until théy had developed some sense of 
sin and some craving after a holiness 
beyond their reach, they were not ready 
to welcome a Redeemer.—yevdpevov . . . 
νόμον. The incarnate Son of God took 
upon Him our nature and our duties. 
He was (1) born of woman, (2) made 
subject to Law. His subjection to Law 
is so expressly associated with the sub- 
ection of the world in general to Law 


that the term cannot be limited (as our 
versions limit it) to the Law of Moses, 
Christ was in fact subjected also to Roman 
Law, and died by its sentence. 

Ver. 5. twa... tva. These two 
final clauses couple together two gracious 
purposes of God in the scheme of re- 
demption, (1) the obliteration of a guilty 
past, (2) divine adoption with the blessings 
which sonship entails. The description 
under Law includes Gentiles as well as 
Jews: for though they had not the Law, 
they were not without Law to God (ef. 
Rom. ii. 14... ἡ): they have indeed 
been expressly specified in iii. 14 as 
included in the redemption from the 
curse of the Law.—aroAdBopev. This 
verb denotes receiving back, as ἀποδι- 
δόναι does giving back (cf. Luke xix. 8): 
accordingly it describes the adoption in 
Christ as a restoration of the original 
birthright, withheld throughout many 
generations for the sake of necessary 
discipline. 

Ver. 6. Sonship involves relations ot 
mutual confidence and love between the 
Father who bestows His choicest gifts, 
and the Son who responds with His 
whole heart. Υ 

Ver. 7. διὰ Θεοῦ. This language is 
unusual, and many variations are found 
in MSS. and versions, amidst them the 
Received Text Θεοῦ διὰ Χριστοῦ, but 
there can be little question on MS. 
evidence that the above is the genuine 
text. As for the true force of the words, 
the Epistle has now traced the scheme 
of redemption and design of bestowing 
a heavenly inheritance in Christ as far 
back as the patriarchs, and has shown 
that from the time of Abraham downwards 
God was disciplining Israel with a view 
to their becoming sons of God, and again 
that He was really ordering the lives of 
Gentiles likewise, though they knew 
Him not, with the same intent. With 
good reason therefore it is here said 
“through God—through His original 














47-12. 


λεύσατε τοῖς φύσει ph! οὖσι θεοῖς" 9. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


νῦν δὲ, γνόντες Θεὸν, μᾶλλον 


δὲ γνωσθέντες ὑπὸ Θεοῦ, πῶς ἐπιστρέφετε πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀσθενῆ καὶ 


πτωχὰ στοιχεῖα, οἷς πάλιν ἄνωθεν δουλεύειν θέλετε ; 1ο. ἡμέρας 


παρατηρεῖσθε, καὶ μῆνας, καὶ καιροὺς, καὶ ἐνιαυτούς. 


11. Φοβοῦμαι ὑμᾶς, μή πως εἰκῆ κεκοπίακα εἰς ὑμᾶς. 


12. Γίνεσθε 


1 φυσει μη ΜΑΒΟΒΊΕΡ; μη φυσει ὈΞἜΘΚΙ, 


design and providential care—thou hast 
now become son and heir”. 

Vv. 8-10. But THOUGH IN TIME PAST 
WHEN YOU KNEW NOT GOD YOU WERE 
SLAVES TO FALSE GODS, HOW CAN YOU, 
NOW THAT YOU HAVE LEARNT TO KNOW 
HIM, OR RATHER HAVE BEEN RECOGNISED 
By HIM, TURN BACK TO THE LESSONS OF 
CHILDHOOD AND CRAVE A BONDAGE TO 
TIMES AND SEASONS ?—The guilt of past 
idolatry is palliated on the score of 
ignorance, in the same spirit as in Acts 
xvii. 30, in order to press home the 
responsibility of those who have learnt 
to know God (γνόντες Θεόν) in Christ. 
There was some excuse for their former 
bondage to imaginary gods who had no 
real existence: but how can they now 


turn back in heart to the weak and 


beggar!y lessons of their spiritual child- 
hood after they have received the spirit 


ofsonship? Instead of ruling their own 


lives by reason and conscience under the 
guidance of the Spirit like men in Christ, 
they are bent on subjecting themselves 


- like children to elementary rules of formal 


service. 

Ver. 9. μᾶλλον δὲ. This correction 
is added, lest any should pride themselves 
on their knowledge of God, to warn them 
that it is not due to their own act, but 
to God who recognised them as His sons 
and revealed Himself to them. ἀσθενῆ 
καὶ πτωχὰς Hitherto the Apostle has 
spoken with respect of the education 
even to the world before Christ (iv. 1-3), 

ing in mind the progress of the Greek 
and Roman world in social habits, in- 
Stitutions and laws: they had in fact 
learnt much in the sphere of morals and 
Natural religion that would bear com- 
parison with the progress of Israel under 
the light of the revealed Law of God. 
But when he compares the mechanical 
toutine of formal observances which 
formed the staple of religion for the 
heathen and for many so-called religious 
Jews with the spiritual teaching of the 
Gospel, he does not hesitate to denounce 
them as weak and beggarly. 

Ver. το. The observance of Sabbaths 
and new moons, of feasts and fasts, of 


VOL, IIL 


sabbatical and jubilee years, was clearly 
enjoined by the ceremonial Law; and 
Paul admitted the obligations of that Law 
for himself and for all the Circumcision. 
He continued to frequent the Sabbath- 
worship of the synagogue, attended the 
feasts, bound himself under voluntary 
vows. What he condemns is the adoption 
of these practices by baptised Gentiles: for 
this imputed to them an inherent sacred- 
ness incompatible with the true freedom 
of the Spirit. 

Vv. 11-20. DISAPPOINTMENT OF THE 
APOSTLE AT THE CHANGED FEELING OF 
HIS CONVERTS ; REMINISCENCES OF THE 
PAST; PATHETIC APPEAL TO OLD AFFEC- 
TION; PROTEST AGAINST PRESENT ES- 
TRANGEMENT.—Ver, 12. Our versions 
abruptly sever the connection of this 
verse with the previous context, and do 
great violence to the Greek text in both 
clauses. They transpose the words ἀδελ- 
pol δέομαι ὑμῶν from their true place at 
the end of the verse to the beginning, and 
render γίνεσθε ὡς ἐγώ, Be ye as I am. 
But this makes it = γίνεσθε ὁποῖος ἐγώ 
εἰμι (cf. Acts xxvi. 29), though it is im- 
possible to understand εἰμι in the Greek 
text after γίνεσθε. The context points 
distinctly to ἐγενόμην as the proper 
supplement after ὡς ἐγώ. The last verse 
has carried back the author’s thoughts to 
his original ministry, and he proceeds to 
revive the remembrance of that period. 
“Act as I did (he exclaims); deal with 
me as I dealt with you.’ Instead of a 
mere vague admonition to imitate his 
character he is holding up his actual 
conduct for an example to them, and 
proceeds to specify the particular occa- 
sion to which he refers.—ér κἀγὼ... .: 
For I too beseech you as you, brethren, 
besought me. It is an obvious error to 
detach κἀγώ from the following verb 
δέομαι and supply εἰμι, as is done in 
our versions. The Greek requires a verb 
to be supplied after ὑμεῖς corresponding 
to κἀγὼ δέομαι ὑμῶν, and I understand 
accordingly ἐδεήθητέ pov. 

The Galatians could not fail to recollect 
the occasion to which these words refer ; 
for it was the true birthday of their 


ΤΩ 


178 


ὡς ἐγὼ, ὅτι κἀγὼ ὡς ὑμεῖς, ἀδελφοὶ, δέομαι ὑμῶν. 


ἠδικήσατε οἴδατε δὲ ὅτι δι᾿ 


Church, the memorable crisis when at 
the close of Paul’s address the Jews de- 
parted from the synagogue, but the Gen- 
tiles besought him to repeat to them the 
words of life on the following Sabbath; 
after which many Jews and proselytes 
followed Paul and Barnabas persuading 
them to abide by the doctrine of the grace 
of God. (See Acts xiii. 42, 43. In the 
Greek text it is clear that the persuasion 
proceeded from them, and not from Paul 
and Barnabas.) The Galatians had then 
been suitors to Paul to maintain the free- 
dom of the Gospel, he was now a suitor 
to them in his turn for its maintenance. 
---οὐδέν pe ἠδικήσατε: Ye had done meno 
wrong. ‘The force of this clause appears 
from what follows: Paul is dwelling on 
the mutual relations between him and the 
Galatians at the time of that memorable 
petition. They on their side had done 
him no wrong, they had not driven him 
away by persecution or illtreatment, yet 
up to that time (τὸ πρότερον) he had only 
been induced by illness to preach to them. 
The Galatians had, in short, given him no 
excuse for passing them by, as he in- 


tended to do, until he was attacked by - 


an illness which left him no option, 

Ver. 13. δι᾽ ἀσθένειαν. This can only 
mean owing to infirmity of the flesh, i.e., 
to illness. διά with accusative has the 
same causal force in the N.T. as in Attic 
Greek. A phrase like διὰ νύκτα, by night, 
is found in Homer, but διά subsequently 
lost its temporal force, and only regained 
it in the Latinised Greek of later centuries 
from confusion with the Latin per. The 

osition of δι᾽ ἀσθένειαν before the verb 
ays stress upon the fact that the ministry 
was due to illness alone, and not to spon- 
taneous resolve. 

It appears from this and the following 
verses that the illness occurred under the 
eyes of the Galatians, who watched its 
progress, were familiar with its repulsive 
symptoms, and displayed tender sympathy 
with the sufferer. They were aware also 
of the alteration it had made in his plans. 
The inference from these facts is clear, 
that he did not intend at the time of his 
arrival in Galatia to preach there at all, 
but was prostrated immediately after by 
sudden illness, and so forced to relinquish 
his previous project and abandon for the 
present any further journey. The only 
conceivable way, in short, in which an 
attack of illness in Galatia can have 
occasioned his preaching there was by in- 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


IV. 


13. οὐδέν pe 
ἀσθένειαν τῆς σαρκὸς εὐηγγελισάμην 


voluntary detention. Here, accordingly, 
the motive for mentioning it is to show 
how little claim he had on the gratitude 
of the Galatians at that time, and how 
little he had deserved the tender sympathy 
which they exhibited. The historical con- 
nection of this illness with the ministry of 
Paul and Barnabas is investigated in the 
Introduction (pp. 135-7). 

It has been suggested that this attack 
was perhaps identical with the σκόλοψ 
τῇ σαρκί mentioned in 2 Cor. xii. 7, and 
this may be true, but the real nature of 
the σκόλοψ is unknown. Some features 
of this attack on the contrary may be 
inferred from the description given of its 
effects: it incapacitated the patient for 
travel, produced disfigurement and offen- 
sive symptoms, but allowed free inter- 
course with those around him. His 
success in winning the hearts of those 
who visited him in his sick chamber 
suggests a chronic ailment prolonged 
for a considerable time, as does also the 
complete change in his plans. The only 
definite hint given of a specific malady 
is the language of ver. 15: from which 
I gather that the eyesight was imperilled 
by a virulent attack of ophthalmia. That 
disease was notoriously prevalent in the 
lowlands of Pamphylia through which 
he had been travelling, and if so con- 
tracted, would produce the symptoms 
described. The pathetic appeal to Gala- 
tian sympathy on the score of imperfect 
sight in vi. 11 confirms this view. If 
his sight had been impaired by an illness 
to which they had themselves ministered 
with tender solicitude, they would be 
quick to feel for his privation.—rd πρό- 
τερον. Lightfoot contends with justice 
that this phrase cannot on account of 
the prefixed article refer to an indefinite 

riod in time past. The author clearly 
had in his mind two distinct periods, an 
earlier and a later, during the earlier of 
which he states that his preaching had 
been occasioned by illness. Lightfoot 
suggests that he referred perhaps to the 
two visits which he had paid to the 
Galatian Churches: and the suggestion 
is reasonable if his theory be accepted 
of sites in Northern Galatia, for no details 
are known of either visit. But it is quite 
incompatible with the history of his 
ministry in Southern Galatia recorded 
in Acts xili., xiv. That lasted over two 
winters at the very least, comprised two 
visits at considerable intervals to eacb of 








13—17. 


ΠΡῸΣ TAAATAS 


179 


ὑμῖν τὸ πρότερον, 14. καὶ τὸν πειρασμὸν Spay! ἐν τῇ σαρκί pou οὐκ 
ἐξουθενήσατε οὐδὲ ἐξεπτύσατε, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἄγγελον Θεοῦ ἐδέξασθέ με, 


ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν. 


15. ποῦ 3 οὖν 6 μακαρισμὸς ὑμῶν ; μαρτυρῶ 


γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι, εἰ δυνατὸν, τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν ἐξορύξαντες ἐδώκατέ 


μοι. 


16. ὥστε ἐχθρὸς ὑμῶν γέγονα ἀληθεύων ὑμῖν, 17. Ζηλοῦσιν 


ὑμᾶς οὐ καλῶς, ἀλλὰ ἐκκλεῖσαι ὑμᾶς θέλουσιν, ἵνα αὐτοὺς ζηλοῦτε. 


λυμων ΜΑΒΌΞΕΕ 17, etc.; μου τον D°EKLP, 
3 που SNABCFGP 5, εἴς. ; τις DEKL. 
8 εδωκατε MABCD! 17, 47; av eSwxare ΝΟ ΕΚΙΡ 


the Churches, and displayed through- 
out as resolute an initiative, as deter- 
mined energy, as vigorous activity, as 
can be found in the whole course of his 
apostolic career. That ministry gave 
certainly no sign of illness, but the 
contrary. We have seen, however, that 
it was preceded by a prolonged illness, 
during which he was probably confined 
to his sick chamber and could only 
minister to those who visited him there. 
His first ministry in Galatia passed in 
short through two distinct stages, first 
the private ministrations of a sick man, 
and then a public career of unexampled 
vigour and success. The last verse 
placed the readers on the division line 
between the two, for it reminded them 
of the memorable petition addressed to 
him and Barnabas at the close of his 
first public address in the synagogue of 
the Pisidian Antioch. It is, therefore, 
of the preceding period that he writes 
here, ‘‘ You know that it was owing to 
illness that I had preached to you up to 
that time (τὸ πρότερον) ᾿. It is needless 
to dwell on the complete harmony of this 
interpretation with the context. 
Ver. 14. τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν. The 
best MSS. all read ὑμῶν, not pov or 
ου τον. The accusative τὸν πειρασμόν 
is not governed by ἐξουθενήσατε or 
ἐξεπτύσατε, whose real object is the pe 
which follows ἐδέξασθε: it is really a 
pendent accusative in apposition to the 
sentence: As for the temptation to you 
in my flesh (i.e., the temptation to reject 
me with contempt and disgust on account 
of my diseased state), you did not.... 
Ver. 15. ποῦ οὖν. .. The MSS. 
are decisive in favour of ποῦ, which 
makes excellent sense. ‘ You congratu- 
lated yourselves,” it is urged, ‘‘on my 
coming among you, you welcomed me 
as an angel, as Christ Himself: what 
has become of that feeling now? where 
is your satisfaction at your lot?”— 
ἐδώκατε. Some MSS. insert av before 


-making the clause interrogative: 


this verb: the addition would be necessary 
in Attic Greek to express the conditional 
force of the clause, but is not needed 
in Hellenistic Greek—rovs ὀφθαλμοὺς 
ὑμῶν. The full force of ὑμῶν may be 
given in English by the rendering your 
own eyes : for it lays stress on the contrast 
between their eyes and those of Paul. 
The addition is significant, and strongly 
confirms the view that his eyes were the 
organ specially affected by his malady. 

Ver. 16. ὥστε is often used in the 
sense of therefore to introduce an im- 
perative or an affirmative conclusion in 
the Epistles of Paul, but not an interro- 
gation. I can see no reason here for 
the 
rendering I am therefore become an 
enemy to you is quite in harmony with 
the context, which assumes the existence 
of some actual estrangement. This es- 
trangement is attributed to plain speaking 
which had given offence to the disciples. 
As he had seen no trace of coldness at 
the time of his recent visit, he must be 
referring to some language which he had 
used on that occasion. Circumstances 
forced him to take up strong ground at 
that time on the subject of circumcision 
and to denounce the opposition and in- 
trigues which he had encountered from 
the Pharisaic party. 

Vv. 17, 18. The substantive ζῆλος 
(probably derived from Céew, burn) de- 
notes some kind of passionate desire. 
Whether it was of good or evil tendency 
depended on the nature of its object and 
the spirit in which it was pursued: for the 
same term was used to designate zeal for 
God or for some noble object, personal 
passion, or an exclusive spirit of selfish 
jealousy. The verb ζηλοῦν partakes of 
the same neutral quality. Its figurative 
meaning is here borrowed from the efforts 
of a lover to win favour. The Pharisaic 
party affected (i.e., courted) the Galatians 
in a selfish spirit, being minded to shut 
them out of their rightful inheritance in 


180 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


IV. 


18. καλὸν δὲ τὸ ζηλοῦσθαι ἐν καλῷ πάντοτε, καὶ ph μόνον ἐν τῷ 
παρεῖναί με πρὸς ὑμᾶς, 19. τεκνία μου, οὖς πάλιν ὠδίνω, μεχρις 
οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν: 20. ἤθελον δὲ παρεῖναι πρὸς ὑμᾶς 
ἄρτι, καὶ ἀλλάξαι τὴν φωνήν μου, ὅτι ἀποροῦμαι ἐν ὑμῖν. 

21. Λέγετέ μοι, οἱ ὑπὸ νόμον θέλοντες εἶναι, τὸν νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε; 


1 χεκνια NCACD°EKLP; rexva SQBD!FG. 


Christ, that they might reduce them to 
dependence on their own Law. Paul 
also courted them, not for his own glory, 
but that he might join them to Christ, and 
he was glad that they should be courted 
at all times, even by others in his absence, 
if it was done in a right spirit. They 
affect you (he writes, t.e., court you) not 
honourably, but are minded to shut you 
out that you may affect them. But tt ts 
good for you to be affected at all times 
and not only when I am present with 
you.—{mdrgotre. As there are no other 
instances of ἵνα being followed by an 
indicative present in Pauline language, 
it is probable that this and φυσιοῦσθε in 
1 Cor. iv. 6 are really forms of the sub- 
junctive, though ζηλῶτε is the contracted 
form in general use. 

Ver. 19. τεκνία pov. This is an 
accusative in apposition to ὑμᾶς, not 
a vocative introducing a fresh appeal. 
It is clear from the addition of the con- 
necting particle δέ after ἤθελον that that 
word begins a new sentence. τεκνία is 
usually a term of maternal endearment; 
and though addressed by John in his first 
Epistle to his children in Christ, is not 
used elsewhere by Paul, who prefers to 
address them as children (τέκνα), rather 
than as babes. But in this passage he 
is adopting the figure of a child-bearing 
mother ; he is in travail for the spiritual 
birth of Christ within them (as he says), 
and straining all his powers to renew 
once more the spiritual life which had 
died in them until he could succeed in 
shaping their inner man afresh into the 
image of Christ. 

Ver. 20. ἤθελον. This imperfect ex- 
presses a modified wish, qualified by im- 
plied conditions, like ηὐχόμην in Rom. 
ix. 3 and ἐβουλόμην in Acts xxv. 22. 
He would fain be with them now (ἄρτι) 
instead of waiting for some future oppor- 
tunity, were it not that he was unavoid- 
ably detained by other claims.—aAAdéat. 
This is interpreted by some as a threat 
of increased severity, by others as a 
craving for the use of gentler words; 
but neither interpretation agrees with 
the regular Greek usage of the word. 


The natural meaning of the Greek ex- 
pression is to exchange the voice for 
some other means of persuasion, in this 
case for the pen, and this sense is clearly 
indicated by the context. Paul longs to 
come and speak to them instead of writing, 
and is confident of his power to clear away 
doubts and errors by personal intercourse. 
--ἀποροῦμαι. This middle voice denotes 
the inward distress of a mind tossed to and 
fro by conflicting doubts and fears. 

Vv. 21-30. PATRIARCHAL HISTORY 18 
EMPLOYED TO ILLUSTRATE THE PERSE- 
CUTION OF CHRISTIANS, WHO ARE THE 
PROMISED SEED OF ABRAHAM, BY JEWS 
WHO ARE HIS SEED AFTER THE FLESH. 
HaGAR AND HER SON, SARAH AND HER 
SON, FURNISH PROPHETIC TYPES OF 
THE MUTUAL RELATIONS BETWEEN THE 
Two. AS HIS ELDER SON, THE SLAVE- 
BORN ISHMAEL, WAS CAST OUT FOR 
MOCKING THE FREEBORN CHILD, SO THE 
OLDER ISRAEL UNDER BONDAGE TO THE 
LAW WILL BRING ON THEMSELVES THE 
DOOM OF NATIONAL REJECTION BY PER- 
SECUTING THE TRUE ISRAEL ΟΕ GoD 
WHOM CHRIST HATH ENDOWED WITH 
THE FREEDOM OF THE SPIRIT.—The 
force of this illustration depends on the 
distinction drawn in iii. 16-22 between 
the seed of promise and the seed of 
Abraham after the flesh. The argument 
of Rom. ix.6... is likewise based on 
the successive exclusion of the latter 
from inheritance of the blessing. John 
the Baptist and Jesus Himself expressly 
warned the Jews not to rely on their 
claim to be sons of Abraham. 

Isaac the child of promise, only son of 
a free mother after years of barrenness, 
and heir to an indisputable birthright, 
aptly prefigured the Church of Christ, 
born in the fulness of time, made free 
by the gift of the Spirit, and established 
for ever in the house of their heavenly 
Father by an eternal covenant of adoption. 
Ishmael again, who had for some years 
filled the position of a son without the 
birthright which could entitle him to 
inherit the blessing, but was eventually 
driven out for his mockery of the promised 
child supplied an exact prototype οἵ 








18—25. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


181 


22. Γέγραπται γὰρ, ὅτι ᾿Αβραὰμ δύο υἱοὺς ἔσχεν, ἕνα ἐκ τῆς παι- 
δίσκης, καὶ ἕνα ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας - ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης 
κατὰ σάρκα γεγέννηται, 23. ὁ δὲ ἐκ τῆς ἐλευθέρας δι᾽ ἐπαγ- 


yedias.? 


24. ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα - αὗται γάρ εἰσιν δύο 3 


διαθῆκαι - μία μὲν ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ, εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα, ἥτις ἐστὶν 
“Ayap 25. (τὸ γὰρ ὅ Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ ᾿Αραβίᾳ), συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ 


1 δι᾿ ἐπαγγελιας NAC 17, 73; δια THs er. BDEFGKLP. 


2 δυο (without at) NCABCDEFGKLP. 


Sno yap CFG; to δε 17; το Ayap B; ro 8 Ayap ADE; to yap Ayap KLP. 


Israel after the flesh, long recognised as 
the people of God, but bound under the 
Law, and eventually destined to be shut 
out from the household of God for their 
guiltin persecutingChrist and His Church. 
--τ. νόμον οὐκ ἀκούετε. This is a re- 
monstrance addressed to men who are 
bent on upholding the authority of the 
Law, but are indifferent to the lessons 
which it teaches. ἀκούειν has this force 
of listening, not only when used ab- 
solutely, but when coupled as it is here 
with an accusative (cf. Luke x. 39, Eph. 
i, 13). 

Wy. 22. γέγραπται ὅτι. The state- 
ment which follows is not a quotation, 
but a summary of recorded facts. 

Hagar and Sarah are entitled the hand- 
maid and the freewoman because they 
are accepted types of each class in 
Scripture. In the LXX παιδίσκη denotes 
any young woman (e¢.g., Ruth) as it does 
in Attic Greek, but in the N.T. παιδίσκη» 
a handmaid, corresponds to παῖς, a male 
servant. 

Ver. 23. The two who were coupled 
together in the last verse as sons of one 
father are here contrasted in respect of 
their different mothers. — γεγέννηται. 
The perfect is used in order to present 
the birth as a Scripture record now in 
existence (cf. Heb. xi. 17, 28 ...): other- 
wise the aorist ἐγεννήθη would have been 
appropriate. — 8.’ ἐπαγγελίας. There 
is an alternative reading διὰ τῆς ἐπ. 
supported by equal MS. authority: but 
it is difficult to attach any meaning to 
the article, whereas δι᾽ éwayy. forms an 
appropriate antithesis to κατὰ σάρκα. 
Like διὰ νόμου in ii. 19, 21 it describes 
the attendant circumstances under which 
the birth took place, διά not having an 
instrumental force. 

Ver. 24. ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα. 
No doubt is thrown on the historical 
truth of the patriarchal history by classing 
the story of Ishmael with allegories: 
though an additional value is thereby 


claimed for it as embodying spiritual 
truth,and typifying the permanent relation 
between the two seeds.—atrat γάρ εἰσιν. 
The two women are identified with the 
two covenants, the Sinaitic and the 
Christian, which they typify: and the 
characteristic features of the two are 
declared to be slavery and freedom.— 
γεννῶσα. This term is applied to the 
conception of the mother in Luke i. 13, 
57 also, though more often applied to the 
father. 

Ver. 25. τὸ γὰρ. The variety of read- 
ings in the MSS., το Ayap, To yap Ayap, 
το δε Ayap, To yap, indicates some primi- 
tive error of transcription. It is hardly 
possible to extract any reasonable sense 
from the three first: for τὸ ἽΑγαρ cannot 
mean Hagar herself: it denotes the name 
Hagar, and Stanley’s attempt to connect 
this name with Sinai proved futile. How 
then can the statement be understood 
that the name Hagar is Sinai, or that it 
answers to Jerusalem? How again can 
the superfluous description of Sinai asa 
mountain in Arabia be explained? More- 
over, the reading τὸ “Ayap without any 
connecting particle is intolerable in Greek 
language, and 8€ or ydp was probably 
added to correct the solecism. Hence 
I conclude that “Ayap was probably an 
error in transcription for the original γάρ, 
suggested by its occurrence immediately 
before. 

The statement in the text on the con- 
trary, For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia, 
is full of meaning when it is remembered 
that Hagar had no connection with Sinai 
itself, but that she found a home for 
herself and her children in Arabia.— 
συστοιχεῖ. The previous clause τὸ yap 
- + ApaBia is a parenthesis, ἥτις is 
therefore the subject of συστοιχεῖ. The 
Apostle finds in the actual state of 
Jerusalem and her children the same 
characteristic feature of slavery as in 
the covenant of Sinai. 


Ver. 26. ἡ ἄνω Ἵερ. The Psalms and 


182 


viv Ἱερουσαλὴμ, δουλεύει yap! μετὰ τῶν τέκνων αστῆς. 
Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἐλευθέρα ἐστὶν, ἥτις ἐστὶ μήτηρ ἡμῶν. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ Iv. 


26. ἡ δὲ ἄνω 
27. γέγραπται 


γὰρ, Εὐφράνθητι, στεῖρα ἡ οὐ τίκτουσα ῥῆξον καὶ βόη- 
σον, ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσα" ὅτι πολλὰ τὰ τέκνα τῆς ἐρήμου 


μᾶλλον ἢ τῆς ἐχούσης τὸν ἄνδρα. 


28. ἡμεῖς δὲ, ἀδελφοὶ, 


κατὰ Ἰσαὰκ ἐπαγγελίας τέκνα ἐσμέν. 29. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ὥσπερ τότε ὁ κατὰ 


1 δουλενει yap HABCDFGP;; 8. δε ΠΞἜΚΙ,. 


Prophets attest the enthusiastic devotion 
of Israelites to the city of Jerusalem. Since 
the temple of God and the palace of the 
house of David were within its walls, 
it was at once the holy city round which 
clustered the religious feelings of Israel, 
and the city of the great king, of whom 
the royal house of David were represen- 
tatives (cf. Ps. xlviii.). The events of 
the captivity and restoration associated 
it still more intimately with the national 
fortunes and aspirations of Israel. Hence 
both Isaiah and Ezekiel invested it with 
ideal glory in their prophetic anticipations 
of the Messianic kingdom. Their visions 
of its future destiny looked forward to its 
becoming the centre of a world-wide 
worship; there the great King of all the 
earth would manifest His presence, and 
thither would flow all nations, offering 
their homage and bearing due tribute of 
gifts and sacrifices. But the Hebrew 
ideal scarcely rose above imaginations 
of an earthly city and a temple on the 
mountains of Israel. It was the function 
of Christian inspiration to spiritualise this 
conception, to eliminate its local associa- 
tion with the typical temple on earth, 
and to substitute a heavenly for an earthly 
city. The Apocalypse bears witness to 
the process of transition. Though it 
adheres closely to the vision of Ezekiel, 
and continues to employ material imagery 
for expressing the dazzling brightness 
and intense purity of the temple-city, 
yet the New Jerusalem is now seen com- 
ing down from heaven to a new earth; 
in place of earthly light it is illuminated 
by the light which emanates from the 
throne of God and of the Lamb; and 
material images are interpreted as sym- 
bols of moral beauty and spiritual holi- 
ness. The Epistle to the Hebrews views 
the heavenly Jerusalem from another 
side. Whereas the Apocalypse depicts 
its buildings, streets and rivers, the 
Epistle describes the throng of angels, 
the assembly of the first-born, the spirits 
of departed saints that are gathered 
there round the throne of God, and 
contrasts the awful majesty of the living 


God with the material terrors of Sinai. 
This Epistle presents the contrast be- 
tween the earthly and the heavenly 
Jerusalem, and between the covenants 
of Sinai and of Christ in a different 
aspect. For the Apostle embodies in 
his conception a purely Greek ideal of 
a city, the mother and home of freemen, 
A self-governed body of free citizens, 
subject to no foreign control, but main- 
taining justice and order in perfect peace 
by their own sovereign will, furnishes 
him with an appropriate type of the 
heavenly commonwealth, whereof Chris- 
tians are even now citizens, dwelling in 
peace together in the unity of Christian 
brotherhood, and independent of all 
restraints of law because they themselves 
do the will of God from the heart. 

The Hebrew form ‘lepovoadyp is 
naturally preferred to the Greek in all 
these passages, because Jerusalem is 
personified as an ideal city. The stress 
here laid on the freedom of Christ’s 
disciples recalls the conversation of 


Christ with the Jews in John viii. 32. 


... but the bondage is there more 
distinctly associated with actual sin. 

Ver. 27. The prophecy of Isaiah liv. 1, 
here quoted from the LXX, describes the 
restoration of Zion, the enlargement of 
her borders and increase of her people, 
under the figure of a wife long neglected 
and barren, but now restored to the 
favour of her husband and fruitful in 
children. This picture was perhaps 
suggested to the prophet by the history 
of Sarah’s prolonged barrenness before 
she became the fruitful mother of Israel, 
and is peculiarly appropriate for describing 
the long delayed but fertile growth of the 
Christian Church, of which she was the 
typical mother. 

Ver. 29. ἐδίωκεν. This imperfect de- 
notes a tendency and disposition rather 
than actual persecution on the part of 
Ishmael. The nearest approach to it 
recorded is in fact his mockery of Isaac 
on the occasion of his weaning (Gen. 
xxi. g). The LXX gives a different 
version of his conduct on that occasion, 





᾿Ξ ἂν. 


a be 
ἘΣ" ἃ, 


ete >, 


i 
} 


3 








26—31. V.1. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 183 


σάρκα γεννηθεὶς ἐδίωκε τὸν κατὰ πνεῦμα, οὕτω καὶ νῦν - 30. ἀλλὰ 
τί λέγει ἡ γραφή; Ἔκβαλε τὴν παιδίσκην καὶ τὸν υἱὸν 
αὐτῆς: οὐ γὰρ μὴ κληρονομήσῃ 6 υἱὸς τῆς παιδίσκης 


μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς ἐλευθέρας. 


31. Διό, ἀδελφοὶ, οὐκ ἐσμὲν παιδίσκης τέκνα, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐλευθέρας 
V. 1. TH} ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς 2 Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσε - στήκετε ὃ οὖν καὶ 


ly ελευθεριᾳ NABCDP; τῇ ed, ουν C°KL; ry ελ. ἢ ὈΡΈΚΙ,; ῃ ελ. FG. 
2mpas Xp. NABDEFGP 17, etc.; Xp. ἡμας ΜΟΟΚΙ, 
ὃ στήκετε ovv NABCFGP 17, etc.; om. ovww DEKL. 


which is accepted in the margin of the 
Revised Version, and seems more in 
harmony with the circumstances, viz., 
that he was playing with the child, 
bearing himself in short as an elder 
brother in the family, and that the 
jealousy of Sarah was aroused lest he 
should claim an elder brother’s share of 
the inheritance. But the Apostle adopts 
the traditional view of his conduct which 
was accepted by the Jews, in conse- 
quence perhaps of the subsequent feud 
between the two races; and discovers in 
Ishmael the same jealous temper that 
was exhibited by Jewish persecutors 
towards the infant Church. 

Ver. 30. Again, the expulsion of 
Ishmael gives warning that those who 
observe the letter of the Law only, and 
lack the true spirit of sonship, though 
they render formal obedience to the will 
of the Father, have no abiding inheritance 
in His house. 

Cuapters IV. 31—V. 12, FREEDOM 
IS OUR BIRTHRIGHT IN CHRIST AND AN 
ESSENTIAL CONDITION OF OUR CALL. 
ACCORDINGLY THE APOSTLE PROTESTS 
AGAINST THE CLAIM THAT ALL CurIS- 
TIANS SHOULD BE CIRCUMCISED, AS A 
DEPARTURE FROM THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST, 
A DANGEROUS INNOVATION WHICH THE 
CHURCHES WILL CERTAINLY CONDEMN, 


-AND A SUPERSTITION OF THE FLESH ON 


A PAR WITH THE GROSSEST HEATHEN 
SUPERSTITIONS.—Ver. 31. The preced- 
ing allegory has illustrated the essential 
difference between the heritage of Jews 
and Christians. Whereas Jews inherit 
bondage to Law, freedom is the Christian 
birthright, derived from their heavenly 
mother. The Apostle now proceeds to 
enforce the truth that Christ bestowed 
this freedom upon us, and that it is an 
essential principle of our call. 

CuHaPpTeR V.—Ver. 1. In the original 
text, which I have adopted in accord- 
ance with the best MS. authority, the 
first clause of this verse is clearly de- 


tached from the second στήκετε οὖν, 
and attached to the preceding ἀλλὰ 
τῆς ἐλευθέρας without any connecting 
particle. But this primary connection 
with the preceding verse was apparently 
obscured at an early period of Church 
history, Owing probably to the frequent 
use of the important section v. 1 ff. asa 
Church lesson by itself apart from the 
preceding allegory. It is difficult other- 
wise to account for the great variety of 
connecting particles c.aployed in MS. 
versions and quotations to transform the 
fragment τῇ ἐλευθ. ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθ. 
into a complete sentence, ¢.g., the ad- 
dition of ἡ, οὖν, or yap, and the omission 
of οὖν after στήκετε, all evidently correc- 
tions made with one object. The division 
of chapters has unfortunately perpetuated 
this error. But the removal of the full 
stop after ἐλευθέρας at once restores the 
full force of the original passage: Where- 
fore, brethren, we are not children of a 
handmaid, but Christ set us free with the 
freedom of the freewoman. ‘The threefold 
iteration, free, freedom, freewoman, marks 
with expressive emphasis the importance 
of this Christian birthright.—jpas Χρισ- 
τὸς. The best MSS. place the object 
ἡμᾶς before the subject Χριστός, invert- 
ing the usual order of words. This in- 
version throws an emphasis on ἡμᾶς, as 
the previous context demands; for the 
whole passage forcibly cont*asts the free- 
dom granted to us Christians with the 
bondage which the Jews inherit.—py 
πάλιν .. + Converts had all alike, 
whether Jews or Greeks, been under 
bondage to some law, human or divine: 
all had been set free by Christ, but might 
now, by the voluntary adoption of cir- 
cumcision, forfeit this freedom and rivet 
the yoke of Law about their own necks. 

Ver. 2. ἐγὼ. The Apostle finds it 
necessary to express pointedly his own 
personal judgment on the effect of cir- 
cumcision in consequence of false reports 
which had been «irculated that he had 


184 


μὴ πάλιν ζυγῷ δουλείας ἐνέχεσθε. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS Υ, 


2. ἴδε ἐγὼ Παῦλος λέγω ὑμῖν, 


. ὅτι ἐὰν περιτέμνησθε, Χριστὸς ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ὠφελήσει - 3. μαρτύρομαι 
δὲ πάλιν παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ περιτεμνομένῳ, ὅτι ὀφειλέτης ἐστὶν ὅλον 


τὸν νόμον ποιῆσαι. 


4. κατηργήθητε ἀπὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, οἵτινες ἐν 


νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε, τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε" 5. ἡμεῖς γὰρ πνεύματι ἐκ 


πίστεως ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης ἀπεκδεχόμεθα. 


6. ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ 


Ἰησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἰσχύει, οὔτε ἀκροβυστία, ἀλλὰ πίστις δι᾿ 


ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη. 


7. “Etpéxete καλῶς - τίς ὑμᾶς ἐνέκοψεν ἢ 


levexopev NABCDEFGKLP; avexowev rec. 


given some sanction to the new doctrine. 
(See ver. 11.) 

Ver.3. μαρτύρομαι. This verb, which 
in Attic Greek denotes the calling of wit- 
nesses, is applied in Pauline language to 
the Apostle’s own testimony.—epitép- 
γησθε, περιτεμνομένῳ: The use of the 
present tense intimates that the warning 
is not aimed at isolated acts, but at the 
introduction of a systematic practice in- 
volving a virtual transfer of allegiance 
from Christ to the Law. 

Ver. 4. κατηργήθητε. This verb is 
applied with comprehensive force to any 
destruction of growth and life, physical 
or spiritual, beneficial or deleterious. 
Joined with ἀπό it denotes the loss of 
some essential element of life by the 
severance of previous intimate relations, 
é.g., annulment by death of a wife’s obli- 
gations to her husband (Rom. vii. 2), and 
emancipation from the control of the Law 
by spiritual death (Rom. vii. 6). Here, 
in like manner, it denotes the paralysis 
of spiritual life by severance of union 
with Christ. This paralysis produces a 
deadening effect on the whole spiritual 
nature, and results in the continuous 
craving for legal justification which is 
expressed by δικαιοῦσθε. --- ἐξεπέσατε. 
As the quasi-passive verb ἐκπίπτειν 
corresponds to the active verb ἐκβάλ- 
Aew, this aorist corresponds to ἔκβαλε 
in iv. 30; so that the combination of 
κατηργήθητε with ἐξεπέσατε contains a 
special allusion to the doom of Ishmael, 
who suffered the loss of his inheritance 
at the same time that he was cast out 
from his father’s house. Disloyal chil- 
dren of God, who prefer bondage to 
filial freedom, have by their own act 
forfeited the birthright of sons, and been 
cast out from His favour and blessing. 

Ver. 5. πνεύματι. In the absence of 
an article this dative must have an ad- 
verbial force, and should be rendered in 
ἜΣ: The Holy Spirit is uniformly 
esignated τὸ Πνεῦμα. --- ἀπεκδεχόμεθα. 


This verb expresses eager expectation 
rather than the attitude of patient wait- 
ing attributed to it in our versions. True 
faith in Christ inspires a confident hope 
of acceptance (δικαιοσύνης) before God. 

Ver. 6. Circumcision conveyed no 
spiritual blessing in return for its bind- 
ing pledge of obedience to the Law. 
In x Cor. vii. 17-22 it is placed in the 
same category as marriage and slavery, 
outward conditions of life which are 
neither good nor evil in themselves, but 
are the appointed portion of some, who 
should therefore loyally accept the burden 
or the blessing. Paul not only paid due 
respect to the Law himself, but even cir- 
cumcised Timothy, when he desired to 
take him with him as his minister in 
Christ amidst Jews, that he might avoid 
needless offence. But he warned his dis- 
ciples at the same time that in resorting to 
it for salvation they were really denying 
the faith, and forfeiting their birthright 
of Christian freedom.—8v’ ἀγάπης. The 
rendering of our versions by or through 
love confuses faith with love, as though 
faith was the result of love or worked 
through its instrumentality. But the 
clause really describes a combination of 
two distinct graces; there may be intense 
faith without love (cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 2); but 
faith ought to work in love, i.e., in a 
spirit of love. Love is the atmosphere 
amid which faith should put forth its 
energy. This force of διά has been 
already noted in the case of διὰ νόμου 
(ii. 19).—évepyoupévyn. The middle voice 
is here employed to describe the inner 
working of the spirit of man, the active 
is used for recording God’s work for man 
in ii. 8. 

Ver.7. ἐνέκοψεν. The figure ofa race, 
introduced by érpéxere, is here carried on. 
Hitherto they had run a smooth course 
of obedience to truth; who had thrown 
obstacles in their way ἢ 

Ver. 8. It was God who called Abra- 
ham, Moses, Samuel and the prophets of 


“ἐξ ee ee 






τ δεον eae 


πων αν 


Sci RE Te ASS Me xy 


= 








ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 185 


ἀληθείᾳ ' μὴ πείθεσθαι ; 8. ἡ πεισμονὴ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ καλοῦντος ὑμᾶς. 


9. Μικρὰ ζύμη ὅλον τὸ φύραμα ζυμοῖ. 


10. ἐγὼ πέποιθα εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν 


Κυρίῳ, ὅτι οὐδὲν ἄλλο φρονήσετε" ὁ δὲ ταράσσων ὑμᾶς βαστάσει 


τὸ κρῖμα, ὅστις ἂν 7. 


II, ἐγὼ δὲ, ἀδελφοὶ, εἰ περιτομὴν ἔτι 


κηρύσσω, τί ἔτι διώκομαι; ἄρα κατήργηται τὸ σκάνδαλον τοῦ 
κ 5» ‘ ε ΩΝ c ὃς 
σταυροῦ ; 12. ὄφελον καὶ ἀποκόψονται οἱ ἀναστατοῦντες ὑμᾶς. 


13. Ὑμεῖς γὰρ ἐπ᾽ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε, ἀδελφοί - μόνον μὴ τὴν 


~ 


ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκὶ, ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης δουλεύετε 


1 αληθειᾳ ΑΒ; τῇ aA. CDEFGKL, 


old and was now calling the Galatians 
through the Gospel of which Paul was 
minister, but this new persuasion was no 
true gospel, and did not come forth from 


- Him. 


Ver. 9. Leaven became a type of 
moral and spiritual corruption in virtue 
of the fermentation it engenders, A very 
small lump might readily form a centre 
of widespread corruption; so stringent 
precautions were adopted in Jewish 
households for the removal of every 

article before the days of unleavened 
eed. Hence the origin of the proverb 
quoted here and in 1 Cor. v. 6. It is 
clear that the taint of heresy had not 
yet spread widely through the Galatian 
Churches: it was more its insidious na- 
ture than its actual extent that alarmed 
the Apostle. 

Ver. 10. Theemphatic ἐγώ with which 
this verse opens reminds the converts of 
the Apostle’s personal claims in the Lord 
on their allegiance. He reckons with 
confidence on their support in pronounc- 
ing the judgment of their church on any 
who may disregard this warning. Every 
offender shall bear his own responsibility, 
whoever he may be. 

Ver. 11. It seems strange in view of 
Paul’s later career that he should have 


. needed to repudiate, however briefly and 


scornfully, the charge of still preaching 
circumcision as he had before his con- 
version. After his open breach with the 
synagogue, indeed, at Corinth and at 
Ephesus it would have been hardly pos- 
sible to advance such a plea. But he had 
recently, before writing this Epistle, taken 
two steps open to this misconstruction on 
which agitators could fasten. He had 
deposited with the Galatians for their 
guidance the resolution adopted by the 
Church at Jerusalem which recommended 
scrupulous regard for the Law in certain 
matters, and he had himself circumcised 
a Galatian convert whose father had been 


a Greek. Paul contents himself with 
pointing for answer to the persecutions 
which he was still enduring at the hands 
of Jews, probably those which befel him 
in Macedonia.—apa. The interrogative 
&pa is far more appropriate to the context 
than the inferential apa. The Apostle, 
being accused of currying favour with 
the Jews, points indignantly to the per- 
secutions he was suffering from them and 
exclaims, ‘‘ Hath the stumbling-block of 
the Cross been done away ?” 

Ver. 12. ὄφελον. This adverb occurs 
also in 1 Cor. iv. 8, 2 Cor. xi. 1, Rev. 
iii. 15. In all three places it expresses 
dissatisfaction with the actual position, 
“Would that it were otherwise”. But 
it acquires this force from its combination 
with past tenses, like the aorist Sedov 
in Attic Greek, When coupled however 
with a future as it is here, it does not 
express a wish, but like the future of 
ὀφείλειν declares what ought to be the 
logical outcome of the present. The 
clause predicts in bitter irony to what 
final consummation this superstitious 
worship of circumcision must lead. Men 
who exalt an ordinance of the flesh above 
the spirit of Christ will be bound in the 
end to proceed to mutilation of the flesh 
like heathen votaries. — ἀποκόψονται. 
This word was habitually used to de- 
scribe the practice of mutilation which 
was so prevalent in the Phrygian wor- 
ship of Cybele. The Galatians were 
necessarily familiar with it, and it can 
hardly bear any other sense.—évacra- 
τοῦντεςς This word forcibly expresses 
the revolutionary character of the agita- 
tion which was upsetting the peace and 
order of the Galatian Churches. It is 
used in Acts xvii. 6, xxi. 38 to denounce 
seditious and riotous conduct. 

Vv. 13-15. FREEDOM IS AN ESSENTIAL 
ELEMENT OF CHRISTIAN LIFE, TO BE 
USED NOT FOR SELF-INDULGENCE, BUT 
FOR WILLING SERVICE TO THE LAW OF 


186 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS 


Vv. 


ἀλλήλοις. 14. Ὁ γὰρ πᾶς νόμος ἐν ἑνὶ λόγῳ weTAHpwrat,! ἐν τῷ, 


Αγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν.2 


15. εἰ δὲ ἀλλή- 


λους δάκνετε καὶ κατεσθίετε, βλέπετε μὴ ὑπὸ ἀλλήλων ἀναλωθῆτε. 
16, Λέγω δὲ, Πνεύματι περιπατεῖτεγ καὶ ἐπιθυμίαν σαρκὸς οὐ μὴ 


τελέσητε. 


17. ἡ γὰρ σὰρξ ἐπιθυμεῖ κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος, τὸ δὲ 


πνεῦμα κατὰ τῆς σαρκός - ταῦτα γὰρ ὃ ἀλλήλοις ἀντίκειται," ἵνα μὴ 


1 πεπληρωται SABC 17, εἴς. ; πληρουται DEFGKLP, 
2 geavtov NABCDEK 17; eavrov FGLP. 

δταυτα yap SBD!IEFG 17; ταῦτα δὲ SCACD®°KLP 

4 αλλ. αντικ. ABCDEFG; avtix. add. NKLP. 


LOVE.—Ver. 13. ἐπ᾽ ἐλευθερίᾳ. Our 
versions render this unto (for R.V.) 
freedom, as though it were the design of 
the Gospel to lead to freedom. But the 
Greek text affirms rather that God’s call 
was based upon freedom, and so makes 
it an essential element in spiritual life 
and the inalienable right of every true 
Christian.—_pdvov ph. A warning is 
added that freedom, essential as it is to 
spiritual life, is open to abuse by carnal 
men, and that it is subject to the demands 
of the higher Law of mutual love. ‘‘ Only 
do not treat it as an opening for carnal 
self-indulgence, but for loving service to 
each other.” μόνον is used in the same 
elliptical way in ii. το and 2 Thess. ii. 7; 
and the ellipsis of the verb after μή is 
common in rhetorical passages.—adgop- 
μήν. This term was applied in military 
language to a base of operations, and 
generally to any starting-point for action. 
In Rom. vii. 8, 11, 2 Cor. xi. 12 it denotes 
an opening for sin, as it does here.— 
SovAevere. This injunction contains an 
instructive paradox. Christians are freed 
from the trammels of outward Law, not 
that they may please themselves, but 
that they may become slaves to the Law 
of mutual love. The true ideal of the 
Christian is not freedom, but unfettered 
service to the love of God and man, which 
annihilates self, and subordinates all 
selfish desires to perfect love. A similar 
paradox is found in 1 Cor. vii. 22, he that 
was called, being free, is the bondservant 
of Christ. 

Ver. 14. - πεπλήρωται. MS. authority 
is decisive in favour of this perfect against 
the present πληροῦται. The perfect is 
likewise adopted in the parallel passage 
Rom, xiii. 8, ὁ ἀγαπῶν νόμον πεπλήρω- 
κεν. For the very existence of love in the 
heart attests the completion ofa previous 


inward act of the will.—év ἑνὶ λόγῳ. 


The single precept which follows em- 
bodies in itself the whole dut,” to man. 


- τὸν πλησίον. The language of Lev. 
xix. 18 is here invested with the compre- 
hensive force which Christ attached to 
the word neighbour by his teaching. 

Ver. 15. If the spirit of mutual love 
does not prevent Christian brethren from 
preying on one another, they are in 
danger of utter destruction. 

Vv. 16-24. MEN WHO REGULATE THEIR 
LIVES BY THE SPIRIT WILL NOT CARRY 
OUT DESIRES OF THE FLESH. For Gop 
HAS SET THESE TWO FORCES IN MUTUAL 
ANTAGONISM WITHIN OUR HEARTS FOR 
THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF KEEPING DUE 
CHECK UPON THE WILL. SO IF YE BE 
GUIDED BY THE SPIRIT, YE ARE NOT SUB- 
JECT TO LAW: FOR THE SPIRIT MASTERS 


-UNLAWFUL LUSTS BEFORE THEY ISSUE 


IN ACTION: AND ITS FRUITS ARE SUCH 
AS NO LAW CAN CONDEMN.—Ver. 16, 
Πνεύματι περιπ.: Walk by the spirit, 
i.e., Regulate your lives by the rule of 
the spirit. You will not then fulfil 
the desire of the flesh, 

Ver. 17. oap&... πνεῦμα. All the 
various motives which operate on the 
mind and will to prompt intention and 
action are comprehended under one of 
the two categories, spirit and flesh. The 
line of division between them corresponds 
to that drawn in 1 Cor. ii. 14 between the 
natural man {(ψυχικός) and the spiritual. 
The spirit of man owes its original 
existence to the quickening inspiration 
of the Holy Spirit, and depends for its 
continued life on the constant supply of 
his life-giving power: its impulses are 
therefore purely spiritual. In the term 
flesh are included all other desires of the 
natural man, not only the appetites and 
passions which he inherits in common 
with the animal creation, but all the 
desires that he conceives for the satis- 
faction of heart or mind. — ἐπιθυμεῖ, 
This is a neutral term equally applicable 
to the good desires of the spirit and the 
evil lusts of the flesh. ἀντίκειται GAA. 





) 





[4- 21. 


ἃ ἂν θέλητε, ταῦτα ποιῆτε. 
ὑπὸ νόμον. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 187 


18. εἰ δὲ πνεύματι ἄγεσθε, οὐκ ἐστὲ 
19. φανερὰ δέ ἐστι τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκὸς, ἅτινά 


ἐστι πορνεία, ἀκαθαρσία, ἀσέλγεια, 2ο. εἰδωλολατρεία, φαρμακεία, 


ἔχθραι, ἔρις, ζῆλος," θυμοὶ, ἐριθεῖαι, διχοστασίαι, αἱρέσεις, 21. 
φθόνοι, φόνοι, μέθαι, κῶμοι, καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις - ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν, 


καθὼς προεῖπον, ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν Θεοῦ οὐ 


lepis ΦΑΒΌϊ; epers CD°EFGKLP. 
ϑζηλος BDEFGP 17; ἴηλοι ΟΡ ΚΙ,. 
5 Insert φονοι ACDEFGKLP after φθονοι; om. NB 17, ete, 


tva. After the coexistence of two con- 
flicting forces, spirit and flesh, in the 
heart of man ha’ been definitely affirmed, 
it is here added that these are set (sc. by 
divine appointment) in mutual antago- 
nism to each other for the express purpose 
ot due control over the human will. 
Both alike derive their being from the 
same Creator, though one belongs to the 
natural, the other to the spiritual, creation: 
both alike continue by His will to fulfil 
their several parts in the scheme of 
Christian life. It is beside the purpose 
of the Epistle to analyse the functions 
of the flesh in the economy of nature, 
or to affirm the absolute dependence of 
the human will on the spontaneous action 
of its desires for vital force and energy: 
enough that by the will of God they too 
form an essential element in Christian life: 
the Epistle deals not with their beneficial 
action, but with. their liability to perver- 
sion. For their indiscriminate craving 
for indulgence renders them constantly 
liable to become ministers of sin. The 
mind of the flesh, if left without a check, 
issues in enmity to God and death (cf. 
Rom, viii. 6, 7). Wholesome restraint 
is therefore a condition essential to their 
healthy action. In every community 
this is to a certain extent provided by the 
discipline of education, by social order 


- and law. But in true Christians a far 


more effective control is maintained by 
the spirit, since it is capable of combating 
every wrong desire within the heart before 
it issues in sinful action, and so by 
constantly checking any wrong indul- 
gence it gradually neutralises the power 
of selfish appetites, and establishes an 
habitual supremacy cover the whole mind 
and will, until in the ideal Christian it 
brings them into perfect harmony with 
the mind of Christ. 

Ver. 18. Law finds no just occasion 
against men who are led by the spirit, 
for they themselves check every wrong 
Gesire within them, and so fulfil the 


whole Law. The identity of Law with 
justice and right is, of course, assumed, 

Ver. 19. Though this verse enume- 
rates only evil works of the flesh, it is 
not thereby suggested that its action is 
wholly evil; for the flesh has been shown 
to have its appointed function from God, 
and to be essential to the human will. 
The opening ἅτινα puts the following 
catalogue of crimes and vices in its true 
light as samples, produced by way of 
specimen of the evil effects wrought by 


excessive indulgence of natural e 
without due control, and not an exhaus- 





tive list of the works of the flesh, as the 





rendering which, in Pi me rape 
“slggests. é list bégins and ends with 


sensual vices due to the lower animal 
nature; it couples idolatry with its ha- 
bitual ally sorcery: in specifying the 
various quarrels between man and man 
it adds two διχοστασίαι and αἱρέσεις to 
the corresponding list in 2 Cor. xii. 20, 
perhaps owing to the prevalence of 
religious dissensions in the Galatian 
churches.—aoéAyera. This term, which 
in classical Greek expresses insolent con- 
tempt for public opinion, denotes in the 
N.T. shameless outrages on _ public 
decency—a fit climax to fornication and 
uncleanness. AN oe 

Ver. 20. ζῆλος. See note on iv. 17.— 
ἐριθίαι. The apparent derivation of this 
word from ἔριθος (a hireling) points to 
mercenary motives. The Apostle else- 
where associates it with jealousy, envy 
and vainglory, and contrasts it with sin- 
cerity, union and love. It denotes, pro- 
bably, selfish intrigues.—aipéoers. This 
term is used in the N.T. to designate any 
religious sect or party, ¢.g., the Pharisees, 
Sadducees, Nazarenes (as the Jews desig- 
nated Christians). 

Ver. 21. προεῖπον. No particular 
admonition is here specified: warnings 
against these sins had, of course, formed 
the staple of many former discourses. 

The Epistle has already claimed for 





188 


κληρονομήσουσιν. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


V. 22—26. 


22. ὃ δὲ καρπὸς τοῦ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἀγάπη, 


χαρὰ, εἰρήνη, μακροθυμία, χρηστότης, ἀγαθωσύνη, πίστις, 23. πρᾳύ- 


της; ἐγκράτεια - κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων οὐκ ἔστι νόμος. 


24. οἱ δὲ τοῦ 


Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἷ τὴν σάρκα ἐσταύρωσαν σὺν τοῖς παθήμασι καὶ ταῖς 


ἐπιθυμίαις. 


25. Εἰ ζῶμεν πνεύματι, πνεύματι καὶ στοιχῶμεν. 


26. 


μὴ γινώμεθα κενόδοξοι, ἀλλήλους προκαλούμενοι, ἀλλήλοις φθονοῦν- 


τες. 


VI. 1. ᾿Αδελφοὶ, ἐὰν καὶ προληφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παρα- 


πτώματι, ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι 


1 Χρ. Ιησου SABCP 17, εἴς. ; om. ἰησου DEFGKL. 


Christians the inheritance of sons. That 
this inheritance included a kingdom 
needed no proof; for the conception of a 
Messianic kingdom ran through Hebrew 
prophecy and covered the whole range 
of Gospel teaching. 

Ver. 22. Since the object of this verse 
is to exhibit the harmony between the 
fruit of the spirit and the restraints of 
law, those qualities only are specified 
which affect man’s duty to his neighbour. 
Love with its unfailing attendants, inward 
joy and peace, supplies the motive power ; 
long-suffering in the face of wrongs and 
ill-treatment, kindness in rendering ser- 
vice to others, and goodness in the free 
bestowal of bounty on those who need, 
cannot fail to gain goodwill; good faith, 
meekness, self-control enlist confidence 
and respect.—ttoris. It is clear from 
the subordinate place here assigned to 
πίστις that it does not here denote the 
cardinal grace of faith in God which is 
the very root of all religion, but rather 
good faith in dealings with men, and due 
regard to their just claims. 

Ver. 23. πραὕὔτης: Meekness is the 
outcome of true humility, the bearing 
towards others which results from a 
lowly estimate of ourselves.—éyxpdareta : 
Self-control comprehends every form of 
temperance, and includes the mastery of 
all appetites, tempers and passions. 

Ver. 24. ἐσταύρωσαν. The Apostle 
has already traced back his own spiritual 
life to the fellowship with the crucifixion 
of Christ, which he had undergone at his 
conversion (ii. 20). He assumes that his 
converts have likewise crucified the will 
of the flesh—not, however (as the pre- 
vious context shows), that that will is 
already dead, but that the spirit has by 
one decisive victory asserted its complete 
supremacy in all true Christians, and so 
given an earnest of its entire triumph in 
the end.—-aa@ypaow. This word de- 
parts here from its usual meaning, suf- 
/erings, and expresses inward emotions, 


as in Rom. vii. 5. Greek philosophers 
applied πάθος in like manner to denote 
active impulses of passion. 

CHAPTER V. 25.—VI. 6. RULES OF 
CONDUCT DICTATED BY THE SPIRIT OF 
MutuaL Love.—Ver. 25. Here, as in 
ii, 20, the thought of crucifixion with 
Christ suggests that of the new life which 
is its sequel. If, then, we live in spirit 
(i.e., if we have spiritual life), let us 
take the spirit for the rule to guide our 
conduct. 

Ver. 26. The English version pro- 
voking introduces an idea of wanton 
provocation which does not belong to the 
Latin provocantes, nor to the Greek προ- 
καλούμενοι, for this denotes challenges 
to combat, and so describes the spirit of de- 
fiance which animated rival parties amid 
the heated atmosphere of religious con- 
troversy. ‘The verse denounces the vain- 
glorious temper of party leaders which 
found vent in mutual defiance and ill-will. 

Ver. 1. ᾿Αδελφοὶ. The last verse pro- 
tested against unbrotherly tempers; this 
appeal presents, by way ot contrast, the 
claims of brotherly love even in the case 
of real wrongdoing.— kat προλημφθῇ. 
The English version overtaken suggests 
the idea of sudden temptation, and so 
tends to palliate the guilt of the offender, 
but the Greek denotes rather his surprise 
in the very act, and so lays stress on 
the reality of his guilt. The passage is 
urging the tender treatment of actual 
offenders, and the preceding καί enforces 
the claims even of guilty brethren on 
Christian charity: ‘‘ Brethren, if a man 
be actually detected . . . deal tenderly 
with him in a spirit of meekness.”— 
kataptifere. This verb denotes some- 
times the original framing of a mechanism 
(e.g., of the human body and of the 
universe in Heb.-x. 5, xi. 3), but more 
often its readjustment (e.g., the setting 
of a broken limb, or the mending of nets 
in Matt. iv, 21). Here it indicates the 
correction of an offender with a view to 








| 


VI. I—7. 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATA> 189 


πρᾳύτητος, σκοπῶν σεαυτὸν μὴ Kal σὺ πειρασθῇς - 2. ἀλλήλων τὰ 
βάρη βαστάζετε, καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσατε τὸν νόμον τοῦ Χριστοῦ. 
3. εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὧν, φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτὸν 1 " 4. τὸ 
δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω ἕκαστος, καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ 


καύχημα ἕξει, καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον. 5. ἕκαστος γὰρ τὸ ἴδιον 


φορτίον βαστάσει. 
κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς. 


6. Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ 
Ἴ. μὴ πλανᾶσθε, Θεὸς οὐ μυκτηρί- 


φρεναπατᾳ « ΑΒΟ 17, etc.; eavrov φρ. DEFGKLP., 


his restoration ; and the need of meekness 
and forbearance for the due execution of 
this delicate task is enforced. 

The transition from the plural καταρτί- 
{ere to the singular σκοπῶν is instructive. 
The treatment of offenders belonged to 
the Church collectively, but each member 
needed to examine himself individually, 
in order that he might fulfil his part with 
due humility and sympathy. 

Ver. 2. βαστάζετε. From its original 
sense of taking up, this verb acquires the 
most various meanings, ¢.g., carrying in 
Matt. xx. 12, ministration in Matt. iii. 11, 
robbery in John xii, 6. Here it signifies 
lending a hand to help by lifting heavy 
loads. This does not involve transference 
of the burden, for it is said in 2 Cor. viii. 
13, 1 mean not that other men be eased 
and ye burdened : and in ver, 5 it is added 
that each will have his own pack to bear ; 
but Christian love must ever be careful to 
relieve each in turn when overtaxed by 
crushing loads. 

Vv. 3-5. Any conceit of our own 
strength or goodness is a vain delusion, 
for we are nothing. Let no man com- 
pare his own with others’ work: this 
will only feed his vanity; but let each 
scrutinise his own work. Then, if he 
find there ground for rejoicing, it will be 
in the ability that has been given by God’s 


grace to such a one as he is: for each will 


have his own burden to bear of conscious 
guilt and shame. 

Ver. 4. τὸν ἕτερον. This phrase de- 
notes originally the other of two persons, 
but in this connexion another than self, 
the world being classified under two heads 
—self and not self, so that any other man 
with whom we are brought into contact 
belongs to the second division. 

Ver. 5. φορτίον. This word was 
applied to the pack usually carried by a 
bead or a soldier on the march. In 

att. xi. 30 Christ employs this figure 
to describe the burden which he lays on 
each of his disciples (τὸ φορτίον pov), 


and here it denotes the regular daily bur- 
den laid on Christians. It is necessary 
to distinguish this from the heavy loads 
(βάρη) to which ver. 2 refers as needing 
the help of Christian brethren for the 
relief of overtaxed carriers. 

Ver. 6. Let him that is taught share 
with him that teacheth. The word 
κοινωνεῖν contains the key to the true 
meaning of this verse. Our versions 
understand it here, and in Rom. xii. 13, 
Phil. iv. 15, in the sense of communicat- 
ing to others ; but I can find no warrant 
for this in Greek usage. In Rom. xv. 27 
it signifies distinctly to receive a share, 
and elsewhere to become a partner 
(κοινωνὸς γενέσθαι) and share in com- 
mon with others (1 Tim. v. 22, 1 Pet. 
iv. 13, 2 John 11, Heb. ii. 14). Here in 
like manner it enjoins upon the leaders 
of the Churches the duty of admitting 
all the members to participation in any 
spiritual blessings they enjoy. It con- 
tinues, in fact, the protest against the 
arrogant pretensions and selfish exclusive- 
ness of Judaising leaders.—ayaois. It 
is impossible to restrict this word to mere 
worldly goods, except where the language 
of the context suggests or warrants such 
a restriction, as is the case in Luke xii. 
18, xvi. 25. The language here points 
to the blessings of Christian faith and 
doctrine. —Kkatnxovpevos. Oral teach- 
ing is specified because it was the only 
form of instruction then existing in the 
Churches. 

Vv. 7-10. Gop’s JUDGMENT IS UN- 
ERRING. THOSE WHO SOW EITHER TO 
THE FLESH OR TO THE SPIRIT SHALL 
ALIKE REAP THE HARVEST FOR WHICH 
THEY HAVE SOWN. BUT FAINT NOT IN 
WELLDOING, FOR WE SHALL IN DUE TIME 
REAP LIFE ETERNAL.—Ver. 7. μυκ- 
τηρίζεται. From its original sense of 
sneer this verb was applied in rhetorical 
language to the betrayal of covert ill-will 
and contempt by cynical gestures in spite 
of fair words. There can be no double- 


190 


ΠΡΟΣ TAAATA> V1. 


ζεται - ὃ γὰρ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος, τοῦτο καὶ θερίσει- 8. ὅτι ὁ 


σπείρων εἰς τὴν σάρκα ἑαυτοῦ ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς θερίσει φθοράν - ὁ δὲ 


σπείρων εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος θερίσει ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 9. 


τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν : καιρῷ γὰρ ἰδίῳ θερίσομεν, 


μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι. 


10. ἄρα οὖν ὡς καιρὸν ἔχομεν, ἐργαζώμεθα τὸ 


ἀγαθὸν πρὸς πάντας, μάλιστα δὲ πρὸς τοὺς οἰκείους τῆς πίστεως. 
11. Ἴδετε πηλίκοις ὑμῖν γράμμασιν ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί. 12. 
ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκὶ, οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς 


περιτέμνεσθαι, μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Χριστοῦ pi’ διώκωνται. 


1un after Χριστου SABCDEF 17, εἰς. ; after wa FGKL. 


dealing with God, for He knows all the 
thoughts and intents of the heart. 

Ver. 8. Every action produces an 
effect on thd Gharacter of the actor cor- 

Spo y to its motive as 
the fruit to the seed. If it springs from 
selfish desire, it stimulates πε growth of 
evil lusts, and issues 1n a harvest Of in- 


ward corruption. If, on the contrary, it 

















ABSOLUTE RELIANCE ON THE CROSS AND 


THE NEW LIFE OF THE SPIRIT, AND ΟΟΝ-᾿ 


CLUDING WITH A PERSONAL APPEAL AND 
FINAL BLESSING.—Ver. 11. The Greek 
text admits but one meaning. The use 
of the instrumental dative precludes the 
rendering, See how large a letter I write, 
which would require πηλίκα γράμματα: 
so that the verse obviously calls attention 


be done in obedience to the spirit, it_ to the large letters employed by the writer 


quickens spiritual growth, and_ issues 
erentaally, 16 a harvest of eternal life. 

e heart man resem in 
which he sows, by the mere exercise of 
his will, a future harvest of good or evil. 

Ver. 9. The warnings μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν 
and μὴ ἐκλυόμενοι carry on figures bor- 
rowed from harvest work: the former 
depicts husbandmen tempted to slacken 
their exertions by weariness of prolonged 
labour, the latter reapers overcome by 
heat and toil. 

Ver. 10. καιρὸν. The last verse 
affirmed that there is a due season for 
the spiritual harvest as well as the 
earthly; the same analogy suggests the 
existence of a spiritual seedtime also, 
which we are bound to utilise. — τὸ 
ἀγαθὸν. This word varies widely in 
meaning, like good in English; it is 
applied both to the intrinsic goodness 
of God Himself (Matt. xix. 17), and to 
the mere manifestation of a kindly tem- 
per towards others. So also its com- 
pounds ἀγαθοποιεῖν, ἀγαθουργεῖν. The 
clause πρὸς πάντας attaches to it here the 
latter force: so that the goodness spoken 
of is goodness to others.—+r. οἰκείους. 
Christians are here designated as the 
household of the faith, and in Eph, ii. 19 
as the household of God. 

Vv. 11-18. THE APOSTLE WRITES 
THE PERORATION WITH HIS OWN HAND, 
DENOUNCING THE MOTIVES OF THE 
PHARISAIC PARTY- AFFIRMING HIS OWN 














from this point onwards. The statement 
in 2 Thess. iii. 17, that he regularly dic- 
tated the body of his Epistles (cf. also 
Rom. xvi. 22), merely attaching his sig- 


nature by way of attestation, explains 


this appeal. The size of the letters 
attested the difficulty which he found in 
writing with his imperfect sight, and the 
effort he was now making on their behalf 
proved his anxiety for the welfare of his 
Galatian disciples. They were evidently 
well aware of his infirmity, and needed 
no explanation of this pathetic allusion 
to his blindness. It may, therefore, be 
reasonably read in connexion with iv. 
15. Probably the prolonged attack of 
ophthalmia which had threatened the 
destruction of his sight had seriously 
impaired it, and they who had watched 
his sufferings with such tender sympathy 
would now be quick to feel for the priva- 
tion which the attack had entailed upon 
him. ἔγραψα: I write. The epistolary 
aorist is constantly used to denote per- 
sonal acts of the writer at the time (2 
Cor. ix. 3, Eph, vi. 22, Col. iv. 8, Philem. 
IQ, 21). 

Vv. 12,13. Paul impugns the sincerity 
of the agitators: their affected zeal for 
the Law was a pretext with a view to 
disarming Jewish enmity: they urged 
the circumcision of Gentiles also to gratify 
their own vanity. They had probably, 
like the Jewish Christians at Antioch 
(cf. ii. 13), been guilty of inconsistency 









eS er 


A, Saar 





s— 16. 


ΠΡΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΤΑΣ 


13. οὐδὲ γὰρ οἱ περιτεμνόμενοι αὐτοὶ νόμον φυλάσσουσιν - ἀλλὰ 
θέλουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι, ἵνα ἐν τῇ ὑμετέρᾳ σαρκὶ καυχήσωνται. 


14. ἐμοὶ δὲ μὴ γένοιτο καυχᾶσθαι εἰ 


ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ δι᾿ οὗ ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐσταύρωται, κἀγὼ τῷ 


κόσμῳ. 
ἀκροβυστία, ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις. 


15. ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ οὔτε περιτομή τι ἔστιν,; οὔτε 


στοιχήσουσιν, εἰρήνη ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς καὶ ἔλεος, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ 


τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


1 εστιν SABCDEFG 17, εἴς. ; ισχνυει NcDcKLP, 


in their practice: but Paul apparently 
relies also on his argument in ii. 16 that 
Jewish converts had by the mere act of 
embracing Christ confessed their own 
inability to keep the Law, and could not 
therefore be sincere in preaching to others 
obedience to its rules.—r@ σταυρῷ. This 
dative cannot surely mean 707 (i.e., by 
reason of) thecross. If this had been the 
meaning, it would have been expressed by 
διὰ τὸν σταυρόν. The correct translation 
seems to be, persecuted with the cross, i.e., 
the cross of outward suffering which was 
in those days the lot of so many converted 
Jews, and notably of Paul himself. The 
Cross of Christ is here identified with per- 
secution as it is in Phil iii. 18 with self- 
denial. 

Ver. 13. περιτεμνόμενοι. The present 
participle is more appropriate than the 
perfect περιτετμημένοι, which is read by 
some MSS.: for the author has in mind 
the adoption of a system, as in v. 3. 

Ver. 14. Paul contrasts his own spirit 
with that which his rivals are manifesting. 
They are animated by selfish desires to 
plory over the flesh of others, he will 
plory only in the triumph of the cross 
over his own 














of the world, are both done away. 





“over his own flesh, whereby the power 
f the world Sie find and higcarnal leas 


191 
μὴ ἐν τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ Κυρίου 
16. καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ 
yea upon the Israel of God. καί is not 


properly copulative here, but intensive, 
Those who walk by the rule of the Spirit 
are declared to be indeed the true Israel 
of God, not the Jews who have the name 
of Israel, but are really only children of 
Abraham after the flesh. 

Ver.17. τοῦ λοιποῦ... In depreca- 
ting any renewal of the present agitation 
Paul treats with contempt the prospect of 
serious danger from it. It had disturbed 
his peace and the peace of the Church, 
and must be got rid of, but he describes 
it as a wearisome annoyance rather than 
a real peril.—oriypata. These were in- 
delible marks branded on the flesh. They 
might be self-inflicted: instances are re- 
corded of soldiers branding themselves 
with the name of their general in token 
of their absolute devotion to his cause. 
But they were as a rule inflicted for a 
badge of lifelong service; the figure in 
the text is borrowed from the latter, which 
were either penal or sacred. The penal 
were stainped on malefactors, runaway 
slaves, sometimes on captives; but it is 
clear from the context that the author has 
in mind the στίγματα ἱρά mentioned by 
Herodotus in ii., 113, with which the 
Galatians also were familiar in Phrygian 





~ Ver. 15. Circumcision is again de- 
clared, as in v. 6, to be a mere accident 
of outward circumstance and of no spirit- 
ual import: faith working in love was 
there pronounced essential for Christian 
life, and here a new creation, the birth of 
the spirit in the heart of man. 

Ver. 16. κανόνι. Men need a rule to 
guide their lives as the surveyor or the 
carpenter for the right adjustment of his 


temples. A class of slaves (ἱερόδουλοι) 
attached for life to the service of a temple 


were branded with the name of the deity. 








‘Paul likens himself to these in respe f 
his lifelong dedicati 6 name of 
Jesus, and of ΕΝ marks imprinted πρὸ 

is body, by which he was sealed for a 


+ 
“τς 


servant of Jesus 1ὴ ρεγρείαυ. These 


were doubtless the scars left by Jewish 


_scourging, by the stones of Lystra and_ 
the Roman rods at Philippi, all tokens of 














work. This rule was supplied to the faithful service to his Master in which he 


Jew by the Law in a code of morals, but 


the Spirit quickens in Christians a new ~ 


life whereby the conscience is enlightened 
to discern good and evil for the regula- 
tion of their lives.-—xal ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ : 


gloried. _ 


Ver. 18. μετὰ τ. πνεύματος. This 
form of the final blessing occurs also in 
2 Tim. iv. 22 and Philemon 25, but not 
elsewhere: it was probably suggested 


192 ΠΡΟΣ TAAATAS VI. 17—18. 


17. Τοῦ λοιποῦ, κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω " ἐγὼ γὰρ τὰ στίγ- 
ματα τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ ' ἐν τῷ σώματί μου βαστάζω. 18. ἯἩ χάρις 
τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν, ἀδελφοί. 


ἀμὴν: 
Πρὸς Γαλάτας. * 


τ σου ABC! 17; Κυριου ἰησον C®D®EKL ; K. I. Χριστου NY. 


2arpos γαλατας SABC 6, 17, 135; add ereheoOy FG; add ἐπληρωθη DE; add 
ἐγράφη απο Ρωμης KP 47. 


here by the stress laid on the life of the oldest MSS. stamps it as an addition of 
Spirit in the Epistle. later date. The Epistle was evidently 

The subscription ἀπὸ Ρώμης is neither written before the Roman captivity (see 
genuine nor correct. Its absence in the Introduction, pp. 144-7). 


nn να. 


TO SOT κα eT TT Rg eee I er ῖῦσν 


: 








APPENDIX A. 





PAULINE CHRONOLOGY. 


Tue Apostolic Council forms a central landmark in the Christian 
life of Paul between his conversion and his Roman imprisonment, 
dividing the interval into two unequal portions. The length of the 
earlier is computed in Gal, ii, 1 at fourteen years; but this may not 
imply a total of more than thirteen; for the broken years at the 
beginning and end are both included separately in that total. The 
three first of these were spent in Damascus, except a brief sojourn 
in Arabia, according to Gal. i. 18: the remainder in or around Tarsus 
and Antioch, with the exception of one brief visit to Jerusalem for 
the conveyance of alms, and a subsequent mission with Barnabas to 
Cyprus and Asia Minor, The visit to Jerusalem was too uneventful to 
call for notice in the Epistle. Its incidental connection with the history 
of Herod Agrippa determines its date: Herod reigned from 41 to 44; 
his persecution of the Church occurred not long before his death, 
and had already begun when the envoys arrived at Jerusalem. The 
joint mission occupied at least two years, probably much more; its 
success established the position of Barnabas and Paul throughout 
the Church as Apostles to the Gentiles, and led to the controversy 
| _ in regard to circumcision which was settled by the Apostolic Council 





‘at Jerusalem; evidently no long time intervened between its ter- 
mination and the Council. From that time forward the continuous 
narrative of events in the Acts furnishes material for dating approxi- 
; mately the successive stages of Paul’s apostolic career. He and 
| Barnabas returned at once from Jerusalem to Antioch, and many 

Christians gathered there from Jerusalem, including Peter and 

others whose names are mentioned. The length of their sojourn 
| in Antioch and the neighbouring Churches cannot be determined 
with precision, as it is not known at what season the Council took 
| place; if at the beginning of winter, they must have remained there 
: the whole winter; if near the end, perhaps only a few weeks. In 


i either case it is certain that neither Barnabas nor Paul started 
VOL. III. 13 
{ 
| 


194 PAULINE CHRONOLOGY 


before spring, for the navigation of the Levant and the passes of 
Mount Taurus between Cilicia and Galatia were alike closed in 
winter to ordinary travellers. The amount of time spent in the 
second visit to the Galatian Churches, in Macedonia, at Athens, and 
on the way to Corinth, is uncertain, but exceeded half a year at the 
lowest computation, and the Corinthian ministry cannot have fallen 
far short of two years, as it embraced several Sabbaths in the 
synagogue, eighteen months in the house of Justus, and a further 
indefinite sojourn (yet many days) in the city. It may be presumed, 
as he hastened from Cenchrez to Jerusalem to complete his vow 
and keep the feast there, that he arrived before Pentecost, about 
the same season that he departed from Antioch on his travels; so 
that the interval was about three years in all. Another period of 
three years carries on the history to the end of the Ephesian 
ministry; it includes first a journey from Jerusalem to Ephesus, 
in the course of which he spent some time in Antioch and went 
over all the Galatian country in order, then three months’ ministry 
in the synagogue, and two years in the school of Tyrannus, and ends 
about Pentecost (1 Cor. xvi. 8). Another year brought the Apostle 
to Jerusalem, after visiting the Macedonian and Corinthian Churches, 
His imprisonment—first at Jerusalem, then at Czsarea during the 
last two years of the government of Felix and the first part of the 
rule of Festus, and lastly on the way to Rome—accounts for nearly 
three years more, making a period of ten years in all between his 
departure from Antioch on his second mission-journey and his arrival 
in Rome. 

A valuable clue for determining the date of that event is supplied 
by the history of Felix. His recall took place a short time before 
the departure of Paul from Cesarea. He was followed by a hostile 
deputation from Czsarea complaining of his misgovernment; but 
apparently there had not been time to organise and despatch it 
before navigation closed for the winter, otherwise the Roman Jews 
would have heard of Paul’s appeal to Czesar (cf. Acts xxviii. 21); 
so that Felix was still awaiting his trial at Rome. Now it is pretty 
certain that Felix retained the government of Judza for the first 
five years after the accession of Nero, in spite of the disgrace of his 
brother Pallas at the imperial court—as long, in short, as Burrhus 
and Seneca dictated the policy of the empire, and was not recalled 
before 59. In spite of his cruelty and extortion he retained the 
confidence of Burrhus to the last, perhaps by the vigour of his 
government, perhaps from personal motives; and it was probably 
the support of Burrhus even more than the wealth of Pallas which 








ie —— 


PAULINE CHRONOLOGY 195 


secured his acquittal at Rome; for Burrhus procured from the 
emperor, as the result of the enquiry, the disfranchisement of the 
Jewish citizens of Czsarea who had impugned the conduct of Felix, 
and the systematic adoption of a rigorous policy for the repression 
of Jewish sedition. As the death of Burrhus took place in February, 
62, the trial of Felix cannot have been later than 61. I conclude, 
therefore, that his recall took place either in 59 or 60, and that Paul 
reached Rome early in 60 or 61. If Prof. Ramsay is right in his 
contention (Expositor, vol. iii., 1896, p. 336), that the voyage of 
Paul to Palestine took place in 57, this is a decisive confirmation 
of the earlier date. Reckoning back ten years we arrive at the 
spring of 50 or 51 for the date of Paul’s departure with Silas from 
Antioch. If the earlier date be assumed, | take it that the Apostolic 
Council was held some weeks earlier in 50; if the latter be pre- 
ferred, I am disposed to date the Apostolic Council late in 50, and 
to conclude that the winter of 50-51 was spent in Antioch or its 
neighbourhood. Either reckoning leads to the choice of 37 for the 
year of the conversion, according to the computation made in Gal. 
ii. 1. 

It is true that most critics favour the adoption of an earlier date 
than 37 for the conversion, but chiefly (as I think) because so little 
is known of the years immediately following the first Pentecost. It 
seems to me, on the contrary, probable that several years of silent 
growth intervened before the disciples were strong enough in their 
faith to establish themselves in Jerusalem and face the persecution 
of the rulers; and I find in the Acts many indications of a consider- 
able interval. But it is enough here to compare the history of 
the first great persecution of the Church, which gave occasion for 
the conversion of Saul, with the particular circumstances of the 
year 37 recorded in Josephus which impress on me the conviction 
that the conversion occurred in that year. The narrative of Acts 


‘vi.-ix. exhibits a remarkable series of events :— 


1. Stephen was indicted for blasphemy, and after a regular trial 
before the Jewish authorities was condemned by acclamation, carried 
without the walls, and stoned to death in strict accordance with the 
procedure of the Mosaic Law. 

2. This was followed by domiciliary visits to the houses of 
Christians, who were arrested, imprisoned, and condemned to death 
by the Jewish authorities, Saul himself giving his vote against them 
(Acts xxvi. 10). A sudden reign of terror prevailed for a short time 
in Jerusalem; and then ceased as suddenly, leaving the Apostles 
Once more free to come and go preaching the faith. 


196 PAULINE CHRONOLOGY 


3. The Sanhedrim were able to give Saul authority to bring 
Christians from the province of Syria outside Judza bound to 
Jerusalem for trial. 

Historians have with some reason questioned the possibility of 
such proceedings as these in a Roman province: for the imperial 
government maintained with the utmost jealousy its exclusive pre- 
rogative of life and death over its subjects througbout the empire; 
the extreme violence of religious factions made the enforcement of 
this principle more essential in Judza than elsewhere, and the 
repeated but futile efforts of the Sanhedrim to procure the death 
of Paul, first by assassination, then by judicial sentence of the 
Roman governor, exemplify at once their impotence for the in- 
fliction of capital punishment, and the vital importance of Roman 
protection to the Apostolic Church, It is true that one other noted 
Christian, James the brother of the Lord, was stoned to death, like 
Stephen: but that was an isolated act of mob violence during an 
interregnum, instigated by a fanatical high-priest, and promptly 
punished as an outrage on Roman authority. 

The most striking parallel to the trial of Stephen is presented 
by that of his Divine Master. Both alike were found guilty of 
blasphemy, partly on the evidence of witnesses, partly on their 
own confession of faith, But when the Sanhedrim appealed to 
Pilate for confirmation of the sentence, he met the appeal with 
bitter scorn, challenging them in derision of their impotence to 
carry out themselves the sentence of death which they had pre- 
sumed to pronounce upon the prisoner. This was indeed no 
solitary instance of the haughty and arrogant spirit which Pilate 
displayed throughout his administration. For many years he con- 
tinued to earn the hatred of the Jews by his imperious temper 
and excessive severity. It is utterly incredible that intolerable out- 
rages on Roman authority, like the public stoning of Stephen and 
judicial murders of other Christians at Jerusalem, can have occurred 
under the government of Pilate. Now that government lasted ten 
years, and only came to an end by his deposition in the year 37, 
His removal made way for new rulers and new measures in Judza, 
for the -Emperor Tiberius, having then become involved in war 
with Aretas owing to the quarrel between that king and Herod 
Antipas, had commissioned Vitellius proconsul of Syria to lead an 
expedition into Arabia and attack him in his capital Petra. As this 
force had to march across Judza and make it the base of operations, 
Vitellius was invested with supreme authority in that country, 
The support of the Jewish nation became indispensable for his 





PAULINE CHRONOLOGY 197 


success, and Vitellius, a supple and unscrupulous courtier, afterwards 
notorious as the basest sycophant at the imperial court, left no 
stone unturned to win their favour. He at once dismissed Pilate 
in disgrace,! remitted obnoxious taxes, rescinded unpopular regula- 
tions, and repaired in person to Jerusalem to curry favour by feasts 
and sacrifices while his army was on the march. We know from 
Josephus that his most ostentatious and successful display of 
sympathy with the Jews was the restoration of the sacred vestments 
to the custody of the priesthood, which his predecessors had hitherto 
retained in their own hands with jealous care as a hostage for 
Jewish loyalty, and that he bestowed the office of high priest on 
a son of Annas the powerful head of the priestly oligarchy. That 
oligarchy had by that time conceived the same jealous hatred 
against the disciples of Christ as against their master; and an 


unscrupulous governor like Vitellius could find no cheaper means 


of gratifying them than the surrender of an unpopular sect to their 
will, The martyrdom of Christians by Jewish zealots for the 
Law became in short as natural under the circumstances as it was 
contrary to the imperial principle of religious toleration, and had 
been inconceivable under Pilate. The presence again of Vitellius 
in Jerusalem suggests a reasonable explanation of the mission to 
Damascus, which could hardly have been undertaken without 
express sanction from the proconsul, 

Finally, the circumstances of the year 37 completely explain the 
rapid termination of the reign of terror in the Church. For about 
Pentecost Vitellius received tidings of the emperor’s death, and 
being personally disposed to side with Aretas against Herod Antipas, 
he at once abandoned the expedition, and gladly returned to Antioch. 
From the day of Tiberius’ decease no motive remained for courting 
Jewish favour: the new reign brought with it in fact an entire re- 
versal of Roman policy in these regions; the Church enjoyed once 


more comparative peace under the shelter of Roman indifference; 


and before long the threats of Caius Czsar to erect his own statue 
in the temple of God turned the thoughts of the Jews from attacks 
on the Christian religion to the defence of their own. There is in 
short one period, and one only, in the Roman government of Judza 
during which the martyrdom of Stephen and many other Christians 
in Jerusalem was either probable or feasible, and that is the first 
half of the year 37. | 


1The date of Pilate’s deposition and of the subsequent events is fixed with 
some precision by the time of his arrival in Rome: though he hastened thither 
according to his instructions, he did not arrive before the death of Tiberius on 
16th March, 37 (fos. Ant., xviii., iv., 2) 


APPENDIX B. 


COMPARISON OF THE ROMAN WITH THE GALATIAN 
EPISTLE, 


_ Tue position of Paul toward the Roman Church differed widely from 
that which he held in regard to the Galatian, and his attitude in the 
two Epistles differs accordingly. He had the strongest possible 
claim on the loyalty of the Galatians, for he had spent months in 
founding and establishing each of the Churches, had recently 
visited them afresh, and wrote for the express purpose of checking 
a threatened revolt against his Gospel and his authority. He was, 
on the contrary, still a stranger to Rome, had no personal experience 
of their actual condition or special temptations, and no more claim 
on their allegiance than on any other converted Gentiles. He was, 
indeed, deeply interested in the welfare of the Church, and had 
perhaps commissioned Aquila and Priscilla with others of his own 
_ disciples to proceed thither and prepare the way for his own intended 
visit; but the original foundation of the Roman Church was probably 
due to others. Under these circumstances the coincidence between 
certain chapters of the two Epistles is remarkable. If it were limited 
to the expression of certain eternal truths like the antagonism of 
flesh and spirit, and that love is the fulfilment of the Law, the corre- 
spondence might reasonably be expected. But it extends to the 
quotation and application of the same texts, and to the conclusions 
founded on them. Both adduce the same Scriptural arguments to 
uphold justification by faith alone against legal righteousness. Both 
associate the adoption and inheritance of the sons of God in Christ 
with His ancient promises to Abraham and his seed. Both alike 
restrict the function of Law to the condemnation and punishment of 
sin, and contrast its bondage with the freedom of the Gospel in 
corresponding language. Lightfoot argues from this coincidence 
that the two Epistles approximated in date, in spite of the wide 
divergence in their general tenor. But the coincidence is distinctly 


Δι ie i - 














eee ee SE eee «Ἕ-..-ἅ--΄.. 


ROMAN AND GALATIAN EPISTLES 199 


limited in its scope: it is very striking wherever the author is 
dealing with the doctrinal questions at issue between Judaism and 
Christianity and is scarcely perceptible elsewhere. The limitation 
is instructive, for it suggests that the author had made these 
subjects and the passages of the Old Testament which bear upon 
them an habitual topic of controversy with Jewish teachers in the 
synagogue. This view is borne out by comparison of the language 
used by other authors. Even the Epistle of James, widely different 
as are his lessons on the subject of faith and works, bases them on 
the same text as these Epistles, “‘ Abraham believed God and it was 
reckoned unto him for righteousness”. Why was this? Because 
the blessing of Abraham, his faith and his righteousness were pre- 
vailing topics in the religious teaching of his day. Philo likewise 
refers constantly to the same passages of Scripture and bases his 
arguments upon them. Now, what had been the antecedents of 
Paul before and after his conversion? Educated in Jerusalem at 
the feet of Gamaliel, he had been a zealot for the Law, and a sincere 
believer in the teaching of the Pharisees. After growing up to man- 
hood in this faith, he had for fourteen years before he wrote the 
Galatian Epistle been engaged in perpetual controversy with his 
former teachers, encountering in every synagogue the same objec- 
tions, and combating them with similar arguments. Inevitably his 
thoughts and language on such subjects as the blessing of Abraham, 
faith and works, the Law and the Gospel, had become in a measure 
stereotyped; and in addressing former disciples of the synagogue, 
whether in Galatia or in Rome, he fell almost unconsciously into 
identical language and trains of thought. 

The close analogy, however, of the two Epistles in certain parts 
serves to bring out in stronger relief their wide divergence in spirit 
and substance. The Galatian Epistle was evoked by an insidious 
attack on the Christian freedom of Greek Churches, and its tone is 
thoroughly controversial. It insists on the futility of seeking 
justification by obedience to the Law, it urges that Jewish Christians 
have all confessed themselves guilty sinners, and owe to Christ 
their redemption from the curses of the Law; it establishes the 
provisional character of the Sinaitic dispensation, and reduces it to 
a mere preparatory discipline designed for an age of spiritual child- 
hood and wholly unfit for Christians, seeing they have attained 
to spiritual manhood; it dwells on the bondage of Israel after the 
flesh, and identifies unbelieving Jews with Ishmael in their present 
temper and future destiny. In the Roman Epistle we breathe a 
different atmosphere. It is a comprehensive exposition of Christian 


200 ROMAN AND GALATIAN EPISTLES 


faith and duty addressed to the central Church of the Empire from 
the standpoint of an Apostle who claims the right to promulgate a 
new law in the name of Christ for the whole Roman world; it insists 
on the universal sinfulness of Jew and Gentile alike; like the 
Galatian it accepts Abraham as father of the faithful, but is careful 
to add that he is so not of the circumcision only but also of the 
uncircumcision ; it is not content to pass over God’s earlier dealings 
with mankind before Abraham and to identify Christ with the seed 
of Abraham, but goes back to the Fall, and describes him as the 
second Adam redeeming the whole race from the dominion of sin and 
death; it does not borrow its idea of law, like the Galatian Epistle, 
from the Mosaic, but develops the conception of an universal law 
of conscience even in the heathen world which maintains perpetual 
conflict with the law of sin and death in our members. 

The reader can hardly fail to recognise in the changed attitude 
of the Apostle his altered position, and the transformation that he 
had been instrumental in effecting in Greece and Asia between the 
dates of the two Epistles. The earlier is animated throughout with 
the spirit of conflict, and vividly recalls the period when Paul was 
earnestly battling for the spiritual life of his Gospel against the 
surviving spirit of Judaism within the Church. But when he wrote 
from Corinth to the Roman Church, on the eve of his departure, 
having no more place in those parts, the issue of the conflict had 
been virtually settled by the wonderful expansion of the Greek 
Churches, Judaism had lost its hold, and the independence of the 
Christian Church no longer admitted of a doubt. Hence the Apostle 
does not hesitate to write of the national rejection of Israel as an 
accomplished fact, deeply as he deplored it, and earnestly as he 
craved for their restoration to a due share in their inheritance and 
a place in the body of Christ. The Roman Epistle belongs, in short, 
to a distinctly later stage in the history of the Church than the 
Galatian. Its decisive inclusion of Jew and Gentile in one category, 
its identification of Law with the conscience of mankind, its com- 
prehensive scheme of Christian legislation, based on the eternal 
principles of righteousness, truth and love, its maturity of Christian 
thought, proved that the Apostle had passed beyond the earlier 
stage of controversy with Judaism into a region of spiritual conflict 
with evils of faith and practice, and grasping the conception of a 
universal religion had braced himself to meet its demand for a new 
Law and a new life of the Spirit in Christ. 




















THE EPISTLE OF PAUL 
TO THE | 
EPHESIANS ae 














INTRODUCTION 


1. Epnesus. The city with which this sublime Epistle is tradi- 
tionally associated had a notable name in the ancient Greek world. 
A remarkable place belongs to it also in the history of the origins of 
the Christian Church. It emerges far back in pre-Christian times, 
and the glimpses which we get of it from point to point in the course 
of its fortunes show us things of great and varied interest. Its rise 
into an importance which became world-wide, its achievements during 
the palmy period of its prosperity and power, the changes through 
which it passed from the days of its pre-eminence in Asia Minor 
on to its destruction by the Goths and its miserable survival in 
the insignificant modern village of Ayasaluk make an impressive 
story. Its inhabitants were drawn from various sources, Hellenic 
and Oriental. [It was one of the chief centres of the lonian settlers. 
But we are told of strangers who occupied the place or its neighbour- 
hood long before the Ionian immigration. These are referred to by 
Pausanias (vii, 26), who speaks of them as Carians; but some 
modern scholars suppose them to have been Hittites (cf. article 
“ Ephesus” in Encyc. Biblica). The city was colonised mostly from 
Athens, and something of the Athenian genius may be recognised in 
its people. But it is clear that it had a large infusion of Asiatic 
elements. 

In ancient times Ephesus was a place of commanding commercial 
importance. It owed this not less to its geographical position than 
to the energy and enterprise of its people. No Greek city in Asia 
Minor was more advantageously planted. It stood at the meeting 
point of roads which carried trade with them and converged on the 
great line of communication between the East and the metropolis of 
the world. It was the chief city of one of the four great river valleys 
that penetrated Asia Minor, being to the Cayster what Miletus was 
to the Meander, Pergamus to the Caicus, and Smyrna to the Hermus. 
The most important of the Asiatic trade routes and great lines of 
intercourse between Rome and the East was the one that passed up 


204 INTRODUCTION 


by the Meander and the Lycus to Laodicea and Apamea. This 
being so, the commercial supremacy was held by Miletus for a length 
of time, the road which was commanded by it having the advantage 
of being shorter and less difficult than that to which Ephesus was 
the key. But under the operation of influences which we can only 
partially trace things changed in the later period of the Greek 
sovereignty, and under the Romans Ephesus had the place which 
had once belonged to Miletus. It gained largely by the decline of 
other great commercial cities. The overthrow of Smyrna by the 
Lydians about B.c. 525 and that of Miletus by the Persians in B.c. 
494 contributed much to its ascendency. Thus it came about that 
during the Roman Empire it ranked with Antioch and Alexandria as 
one of the three great emporia of the trade of the Eastern Mediter- 
ranean, and formed the commercial capital for the wide and varied 
territory west of the Cilician gates. It rose to the dignity of 
metropolis of the Roman Province of Asia. It was a free city. 
It had an “assembly” and “council” of its own, and a governor, 
or pro-consul, ἀνθύπατος (cf. Acts xix. 38). In the general and natural 
decay of popular government, however, under the Imperial system, 
power fell into the hands of officials, and in Ephesus the γραμματεύς, 
the “town-clerk” (Acts xix. 35) or “recorder,” was the great 
authority. 

Ephesus was originally a sea-port. It stood on the left bank of 
the Cayster, it is true, a few miles up from the sea, but for a length 
of time the channel of the river was carefully attended to and kept 
open. It was never an easy task, however, to maintain a clear way 
between the harbour and the sea. The quantity of silt deposited by 
the Cayster was great. Blundering engineering, undertaken in the 
second half of the second century B.c. under Attalus II. Philadelphus, 
made matters worse. By Paul’s time the passage had got into such 
a condition that, though the city still retained its pre-eminence, 
mariners avoided Ephesus if they could. A serious attempt to 
improve the channel was made by the Governor of Asia, as Tacitus 
informs us (Ann., xvi., 23), about a.p. 65. But effort slackened 
again, and things were left to take their course. The result in 
course of time was that the once famous harbour became a 
troublesome marsh. Ephesus ceased to be a sea-port, its trade 
declined, and the life went out of the city. 

The importance of Ephesus, however, in ancient times was not 
due to its commercial position alone. It had a considerable name 
as a school of art. The great painters Parrhasius of the fifth cen- 
tury B.c. and Apelles of the fourth belonged to the city. Above all, 








= AGT ne, 3 ee τ ee —— ἃ 


Skt. cache So 





INTRODUCTION 205 


it was a place of paramount religious interest. It was the centre of 
the worship of the goddess who was known among the Greeks as 
Artemis and among the Romans as Diana. The temple erected in 
her honour was one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, a 
splendid structure of shining marble, stated by Pliny (Nat. Hist., 
xvi., 40, 213) to have been 425 feet long and 220 wide (but by 
Mr. J. T. Wood to have measured 343 feet by 164), with 127 columns 
some 60 feet high. It is reported to have taken about 220 years to 
finish, In it was treasured an image of the goddess which was 
believed to have fallen from heaven in remote ‘times. Behind the 
shrine was the “treasury,” which was the bank of Asia. The temple 
was destroyed by the Goths in Α.Ὁ. 262. 

Magnificent as the temple was, it was not the only architectural 
wonder possessed by Ephesus. There was the great theatre, on the 
west side of Mount Coressus, a vast structure, the largest Greek theatre 
in Asia Minor and in the ancient Greek world, reputed to accommodate 
50,000 spectators. North of it was the stadium, where races were 
run and wild beast fights were conducted. It was the temple, 
however, that made the chief glory of the city. It was the temple 
that added more than anything else to its importance, The chief 
boast of Ephesus was the title of νεωκόρος, or “ temple-warden ” 
(literally “ temple-sweeper ἢ, rendered “ worshipper” in Acts xix. 
35 by the AV, and “temple-keeper” by the RV. It is true that the 
title was more usually given to Asiatic cities as wardens of temples 
of the Imperial worship, and Ephesus was νεωκόρος first of one 
temple, then of two, and later still even of three. Butan inscription 
of the second century and coins of the third bear witness to the fact 
stated in Acts xix. 35 that Ephesus had the title of Warden of the 
Temple of Diana (cf. Prof. Ramsay’s article on “ Ephesus ” in 
Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible), This vast temple was not the 
only sacred structure that found a place on the slopes of the hill 


which made the original religious centre. Here was built the great 


Christian Church which was dedicated by Justinian to St. John the 
Evangelist. Here, too, at a later date, was erected the mosque 
which is reported to have been one of the best specimens of Arabian- 
Persian art. 

2. THE CuHuRCcH IN Epnesus. It is with the great names of Paul 
and John that the story of the primitive Christian community in 
Ephesus is specially associated, both in the New Testament itself 
and in tradition. John’s connection with the Ephesian Church be- 
longs to the latter part of the first century. We have every reason 
to believe that, after the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion 


206 INTRODUCTION 


of the members of the mother Church, that Apostle made Ephesus 
his home. The historian Eusebius speaks of his residence there, and 
reports certain interesting occurrences which took place during his 
stay. Other names known to us in the sacred history have also cer- 
tain associations with the Ephesian Church. One of these is that of 
Timothy, who appears to have been commissioned by Paul towards the 
end of his career to do some special work in Ephesus. In 1 Timothy 
(i. 3) the Apostle is represented as reminding this his “own son in 
the faith” that he had besought him to abide “still in Ephesus,” 
while he himself went into Macedonia, that he might “charge some 
that they teach no other doctrine”. It may also be inferred from 
what is said of John Mark in different passages of the New Testa- 
ment (Col. iv. 10; 1 Peter v. 13; 2 Timothy iv. 11) that he too 
had not a little to do with the Churches of Asia; and that being 
so, it can well be understood that he was known to the Church of 
Ephesus and visited the city in his journeyings. It has been supposed 
by some that the Evangelist Luke also had some connection with 
Ephesus. But there is no historical foundation for this. Mr. J. T, 
Wood indeed takes the name borne by the modern village which 
represents the ancient Ephesus to be a corruption of aytes Aouxas, 
“St. Luke”, But Ayasaluk or Ayassaluk appears to be a corrup- 
tion of Ayo-theolog, Ayo-tholog, αγιος θεολογος, the name being taken 
from the Church of St. John built there by Justinian. 

It is with Paul himself, therefore, that the beginnings of the 
Church of Ephesus are associated. Men from Asia were among the 
multitudes in Jerusalem who heard the Apostles speak with tongues on 
the day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 9), and it is possible that the first tidings 
of the new faith may have been carried by some of these to the capital 
of the Province. But of that there is no record. The testimony of 
the Book of Acts is that Paul, at the beginning of his second great 
missionary journey, after he had gone throughout Phrygia and the 
region of Galatia, was “ forbidden of the Holy Ghost” to preach the 
word in Asia (xvi. 6); but that at the close of that journey, when he 
was on his way from Greece to Syria, he did visit Ephesus and 
“reasoned with the Jews in the synagogue”. That he made some 
impression on this occasion appears from the fact that he was 
asked to stay. This he could not do, because he had to press on to 
Jerusalem to keep the feast there. But he left Aquila and Priscilla 
in Ephesus and promised himself to return (Acts xviii. 19-21). To 
this brief visit of the Apostle of the Gentiles, followed up by the 
efforts of Aquila and Priscilla, the planting of a Christian Church 
in the capital of the Province of Asia appears to be due. When 


ee ee ee 





PO OE Bee Ph σῶς 





INTRODUCTION 207 


Paul was away in Syria and Asia (Acts xviii. 22, 23) something 
further was effected in another way. Apollos came to Ephesus, 
knowing only of the baptism of John. He had the way of God ex- 
pounded to him more fully by the two devoted friends whom Paul 
had left behind him in Ephesus. The result was that, understanding 
better as he now did the fulfilment of the promised Messianic salva- 
tion, he ‘mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, showing 
by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ” (Acts xviii. 24-28). After 
Apollos had passed on to Corinth Paul returned, as he had under- 
taken to do, to Ephesus (Acts xix. 1). On this occasion his stay was 
a protracted one, extending over more than two years and three 
months (Acts xix. 8, 10), or as he expressed it in round numbers in 
his address to the elders at Miletus “by the space of three years” 
(Acts xx. 31). 

First he devoted himself to the instruction of certain disciples 
who had been baptised only unto John’s baptism and knew nothing 
of the Holy Ghost (Acts xix. 1-7), Then for three months he 
spoke of the things of the Kingdom of God to the Jews in the 
synagogue. In this he had only partial success, and soon he had 
to encounter bitter opposition. He gave up his appeal, therefore, 
to the Jews, and took the school of ‘‘ Tyrannus,” in which he “ dis- 
puted daily” for the space of two years. He did this with such 
result that he turned many from the practice of the magical arts 
which were in great favour in Ephesus, and “all they which dwelt in 
Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks” (Acts 
xix. 10, 20). In other words, the report of the Gospel which Paul 
preached penetrated through the Province, being carried no doubt to 
the great cities by travellers who visited Ephesus, and by missionaries 
or messengers like Epaphras. And for the purpose of disseminating 
the knowledge of the new faith through the Asiatic Province, Ephesus 
was not less singularly fitted by its geographical position and com- 
mercial communications than was Antioch for Syria or Rome for 
the further West. The tumultuous opposition, however, which was 
roused by Demetrius against Paul as a destroyer of the silversmith’s 
craft and a subverter of the worship of Diana, brought his work in 
Ephesus to a close and compelled him to hasten his departure into 
Greece (Acts xix. 21—xx. 1). During his last voyage to Syria he 
did not visit Ephesus itself; but, touching at Miletus, he sent for 
the elders of the Ephesian Church and took his pathetic farewell of 
them there (Acts xx. 17-38). 

So far as the Book of Acts is concerned, that is the last glimpse 
we get of Paul in his connection with Ephesus. In the Pastoral 


208 INTRODUCTION 


Epistles, however, we have some further references to Ephesus and 
to Paul’s care for the Church there. In 1 Timothy (i. 3), as we have 
seen, we find that Timothy had been placed in the city with a view 
to the preservation of sound doctrine, and that Paul desired him 
to remain there when he himself went into Macedonia; and in 2 
Timothy mention is made both of the way in which Onesiphorus 
ministered to Paul in Ephesus (i. 18), and of the fact that Tychicus 
was sent by Paul to Ephesus (iv. 12). The relations, therefore, 
between Paul and this Church were of the closest and most con- 
fidential kind. As to the composition of the Christian community, 
it appears to have included from the first both Jews and Greeks 
(Acts xix. 1-10, xx. 21). The Gentile element, however, seems to 
have been the larger and to have grown more and more, so that the 
Epistle deals with the Church as practically a Gentile-Christian body. 

In 1 Peter (i. 1) those in Asia, including doubtless the members 
of the metropolitan Church, are named among the strangers scattered 
throughout various lands, towards whom the writer has a certain re- 
sponsibility and to whom he addresses his Epistle. In the Apoca- 
lypse which bears the name of John, the Church of Ephesus appears 
among the seven Churches of Asia to which John’s message is 
directed ; and that the Ephesian Church was recognised as the chief 
of the seven may be inferred perhaps from the fact that it has the 
first place in the list and in the address (i. 11, ii. 1). It is also 
with John that tradition connects the Ephesian Church after Paul’s 
decease. Of its later history, it is enough to say that it long retained 
its importance among the Churches, and that, among other things, it 
was the seat of one of the great GEcumenical Councils (4.p. 431), and 
also of the notorious Robber-Synod (4.p. 440). 

3. THE EpistLE—1TS GENERAL CHARACTER, CONTENTS AND PLAN, 
Among the Epistles bearing the name of St. Paul there is none 
greater than this, nor any with a character more entirely its own, 
There have been students, it is true, who with an almost incredible 
lack of insight have considered it an insipid production or a tedious 
and unskilful compilation. Among these must be named even so 
acute a scholar as De Wette. Such pronouncements, however, 
belong to the failures and eccentricities of criticism, and count for 
little. With few exceptions scholars of all different schools who have 
studied and interpreted this Epistle have been at one in regarding it 
as one of the sublimest and most profound of all the New Testa- 
ment writings. In the judgment of many who are well entitled to 
deliver an opinion, it is the grandest of all the Pauline letters. There 
is a peculiar and sustained loftiness in its teaching which has deeply 











INTRODUCTION 209 


impressed the greatest minds and has earned for it the title of the 
“ Epistle of the Ascension”. It tarries largely among “ the heaven- 
lies,” and lifts us into the eternities a parte ante and a parte post. 
It is characterised by a dignity and a serenity which are entirely in 
harmony with the elevation of its thoughts. It takes little to do 
either with the questions of ceremonialism or with the personal vin- 
dications which fill so large a space in others of the greater Epistles 
of St. Paul, The polemical element is conspicuous by its absence. 
There is scarcely even an echo of the great controversies which ring 
so loudly in the Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians. If they 
were still active in any measure or at all in the writer’s view when 
he addressed himself to these Asiatic Churches, they are not on the 
surface at least of this majestic Epistle. The nearest approach to 
any explicit allusion to such things is in what is said in a single verse 
(chap. ii. 11) regarding the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision. 
There is a remarkable cohesion, too, in the composition, part 
fitting in with part naturally and without effort. In its structure 
the Epistle is an unmistakable unity. The whole argument moves 
round a few great ideas. The plan is simple. The Epistle opens 
and closes in the usual Pauline way, and it divides naturally into two 
great sections, one doctrinal and the other practical or hortatory. 
There is first the usual inscription or greeting (i. 1, 2), followed by 
a thanksgiving which takes the form of a solemn ascription of praise 
to God for the spiritual blessings enjoyed by the writer and his 
readers. The mention of these blessings develops into a doctrinal 
statement which deals with the lofty themes of election, predestira- 
tion, redemption and the forgiveness of sins; the mystery of the Divine 
will; the grace of the Holy Spirit as seal and earnest ; the power of 
God in the resurrection and exaltation of Christ ; the sovereignty of 
Christ over the world and His Headship over the Church ; the Divine 
quickening of the spiritually dead ; the abrogation of the Law that 
formed the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile ; the love of 
Christ and His indwelling in the believer. Each of these great 
themes leads easily to the next. In the course of their exposition 
the Apostle enlarges especially on the ultimate purpose of God to 
sum up all things in Christ (i. 9-11); the relation in which Christ 
stands to the universe and to the Church (i. 20-23); the absolutely 
gracious character of the salvation, the new life, and the gifts bestowed 
upon believers by God (ii. 1-10) ; the revelation and fulfilment of the 
purpose of God, hidden for ages, to make the Gentile partaker with 
the Jew (ii. 11-22) ; and the marvel of the grace that has established 
equality and unity where once there were pri ilege and separation 
VOL, III. [4 


210 INTRODUCTION 


(iii. 1-19). This first of the two primary divisions of the Epistle con- 
cludes with a doxology, which again celebrates that gracious power of 
God which works all for us and within us. 

As the doctrinal section occupies the first three chapters, the 
hortatory section extends over the last three. These chapters are 
taken up with practical matters—the necessity of a walk in harmony 
with the Divine call ; the commendation of humility, meekness, for- 
bearance, concord, peace and all good brotherly relations ; the duty of 
growing in likeness to Christ and in obedience to Him; the forsaking 
of all heathen vices ; the practice of truthfulness and honesty, abstin- 
ence from all corrupt communications, from all bitterness and wrath 
and evil-speaking and malice; sedulous watchfulness against any 
falling back into easy compliance with the two characteristic pagan 
forms of moral evil, sensuality and greed, or into any slackness in the 
sense of their deep sinfulness ; the reverent regard of the Christian 
relations between husband and wife, parents and children, masters 
and slaves, and the careful observance of the duties arising out of 
the Christian idea of these relations ; the need for the full spiritual 
equipment provided by God for the withstanding of all evil. These 
various ethical requirements and recommendations are presented 
as all having their roots in the great facts and doctrines of grace 
which are expounded in the former division of the Epistle, and as all 
growing up out of that soil. In their enforcement special prominence 
is given to the maintenance of concord and peace in the Church (iv. 
4); the great object which all Christian gifts are meant to serve (iv. 
12-16); the forswearing of all sins of uncleanness as things wholly 
alien to the Christian life (v. 3-14); the sacredness of the primary 
domestic and relative duties, those above all pertaining to the rela- 
tions of husband and wife (v. 22—vi. 1-9); the seriousness of the 
Christian’s warfare and the sufficiency of the Christian’s armour (vi. 
10-18). The Epistle is brought to its close by some personal refer- 
ences bearing on the writer’s requirements and commission (vi. 19, 
20) ; a brief notice of the mission of Tychicus (vi. 21, 22); anda final 
salutation or benediction, which is given in terms of grace and peace 
(vi. 23, 24). 

In the course of thought thus followed out in the Epistle there 
are certain great ideas that have peculiar prominence given them. 
Of these the largest is that of the Divine grace—the term χάρις 
occurring under one aspect or another some thirteen times. Another 
is that of “the heavenlies,” which has an entirely peculiar place and 
application in this Epistle. Much, too, is made of the conceptions 
of the Divine fulness (πλήρωμα) ; the mystery (μυστήριον) ; the economy 








INTRODUCTION 211 


(οἰκονομία) ; the spiritual understanding (γνῶσις, ἐπίγνωσις, σοφία, σύνε- 
σις, φρόνησις) proper to the Christian and in which he is to increase: 
There are also the ideas of union and unity, union with Christ, union 
and fellowship one with another, the unity of the Church, the one- 
ness of Jew and Gentile, the unity in the diversity of gifts, the unity 
of the faith. These great conceptions run through the Epistle, and 
express themselves in such compound forms as συνεζωποίησε, συνήγειρε, 
συνεκάθισεν, συμπολῖται, συγκληρονόμοι, συναρμολογουμένη, συνοικοδομεῖσθε, 
σύσσωμος. 

The Epistle is remarkable also for the use which it makes of a 
series of terms of far-reaching significance, which belong to the very 
essence of its thought and nowhere get the place and the iteration 
which they have here, except in some measure in the Epistle to the 
Romans, Among these are the counsel (βουλή) of God, His will 
(θέλημα), His purpose (πρόθεσις), His good-pleasure (εὐδοκία), His fore- 
ordaining or pre-determining (mpoopilew), His afore preparing (προετοι- 
patew), etc, 

The vocabulary of the Epistle also is singular and full of interest. 
The letter contains a number of words and phrases which are peculiar 
to itself and the sister Epistle to the Colossians, so far as the New 
Testament writings are concerned—such as ἀνθρωποπάρεσκος, ἁφή, 
ἀποκαταλλάσσειν, ἀπαλλοτριοῦσθαι, αὔξειν, and its noun αὔξησις, ὀφθαλμο- 
δουλεία, ῥιζοῦν, συζωοποιεῖν, συμβιβάζειν, ἐκ ψυχῆς. It has others which 
are confined to itself and certain others of the Pauline Epistles: 
ἀγαθωσύνη, ἀληθεύειν, ἀνεξιχνίαστος, ἐπιχορηγία, εὔνοια, εὐωδία, θάλπειν, 
κάμπτειν, περικεφαλαία, πλεονέκτης, ποίημα, πρεσβεύειν, προετοιμάζειν, 
προσαγωγή, προτίθεσθαι, υἱοθεσία, ὑπερβάλλειν, ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ. 

On the other hand, there are a good many words which occur in 
this Epistle alone of all claiming to be by Paul, although they are 
found occasionally elsewhere in the New Testament, such as ἄγνοια, 
ἀγρυπνεῖν, ἀκρογωνιαῖος, ἀμφότεροι, ἄνεμος, ἀνιέναι, ἅπας, ἀπειλή, εὔσπλαγχ- 
γος, μακράν, ὀργίζεσθαι, ὁσιότης, ὀσφύς, πανοπλία, πάροικος, περιζωννύναι, 
πλάτος, ποιμήν, in the sense of pastor, πολιτεία, σαπρός, σπῖλος, συγκαθίζειν, 
σωτήριον, ὕδωρ, ὑποδεῖσθαι, ὕψος, φραγμός, φρόνησις, χαριτοῦν, χειροποίητος. 
Some οὗ these obviously are of small moment. Others have some 
significance. On these lists see Abbot’s Crit. and Exeg. Comm. on 
the Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians, and more especi- 
ally Holtzmann’s Einleitung and Kritik der Epheser- und Kolosser- 
Briefe. ἴῃ addition to these we have a considerable list of pure ἅπαξ 
λεγόμενα, including ἄθεος, αἰσχρότης, aixpadwredew, dvavedw, ἄνοιξις, 
ἀπαλγεῖν, ἄσοφος, βέλος, ἐκτρέφω, ἐλαχιστότερος, ἑνότης, ἐξισχύειν, ἐπιδύειν, 
ἐπιφαύσκειν, ἑτοιμασία, εὔνοια, εὐτραπελία, ὁ ἠγαπημένος, as applied to 


212 INTRODUCTION 


Christ, Oupeds, καταρτισμός, κατώτερος, κληροῦν, κλυδωνίζεσθαι, κοσμοκράτωρ͵ 
κρυφῆ, κυβεία, μακροχρόνιος, μέγεθος, μεθοδεία, μεσότοιχον, μωρολογία, πάλη, 
παροργισμός, πολυποίκιλος, προελπίζειν, προσκαρτέρησις, ῥυτίς, συμμέτοχος, 
συμπολίτης, συναρμολογεῖν, συνοικοδομεῖν, σύσσωμος. In the case of two 
of these, αἰχμαλωτεύειν and εὔνοια, the TR gives each in one other 
passage (2 Tim. ili. 6; 1 Cor. vii. 3), but on insufficient documentary 
evidence. The introduction of some of these terms no doubt is due 
to circumstance. But an analysis of the vocabulary as a whole 
brings out the fact that in language as well as in thought this Epistle 
has a character of its own. 

4, THe AFFINITIES OF THE EpistLe. There are some resemblances 
which deserve notice between the terms of this Epistle and those of 
the address recorded in Acts (xx. 17-38) as delivered by Paul to the 
Ephesian elders at Miletus, ¢.g., μετὰ πάσης ταπεινοφροσύνης, iv. 2., cf. 
Acts xx. 19; ἐκληρώθημεν, κληρονομία, i. 11, 14, cf Acts xx. 32; the 
Divine βουλή, i. 11, cf. Acts xx, 27; the Divine δύναμις and κράτος, i. 
19, cf. Acts xx. 32; the being builded, συνοικοδομεῖσθε, ii. 21, cf. Acts 
xx. 32. But apart from these we find a number of resemblances 
between this Epistle and other NT writings which are of interest, 
and which may point to certain relationships between them. There 
are a few points of contact, e.g., between this Epistle and the three 
Pastoral Epistles (¢.g., in 2 Tim. i. 9, 10, ii. 1), which have been con- 
sidered to go some way to establish identity of authorship, or at least 
of ultimate source. But these do not amount to much. There are 
other correspondences which are thought to indicate a certain affinity 
between this Epistle and the Fourth Gospel. Among these are 
reckoned the prominence given in both to the great conceptions of 
ἁγάπη and γνῶσις ; the designation of Christ as ὁ ἠγαπημένος (Eph. i. 
4) as compared with the terms of John iii. 35, x. 17, xv. 9, xvii. 23, 24, 
26; the ἐξελέξατο mpd καταβολῆς κόσμου Of Eph. i. 4, and the ἠγάπησάς 
pe πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου Of John xvii. 24; the common use of the 
figures of light and darkness (Eph. v. 11, 13; John iii. 20, 21), and 
the particular phrases ὡς τέκνα φωτὸς περιπατεῖτε (Eph. v. 8), περιπατεῖτε 
ὡς τὸ φῶς ἔχετε (John xii, 35); the designation of the work of re- 
generation as a quickening of the dead (Eph. ii. 5,6; John v. 21, 25, 
28). In both writings again we have the work of redemption pre- 
sented under the aspect of a sanctification or setting apart (ἁγιάζειν, 
Eph. v. 26; John xvii. 17, 19); and in both this is given as taking 
effect by way of a cleansing or purifying by the word—xaSapicas . . . 
ἐν ῥήματι (Eph. v. 26), καθαρὸς διὰ τὸν λόγον (John xv. 3). We have 
also the idea of grace according to measure (4 χάρις κατὰ τὸ μέτρον τῆς 
δωρεᾶς τοῦ Χριστοῦ, Eph. iv. 17), and grace without measure in the one 














INTRODUCTION 213 


case of Christ (John iii. 831). The striking resemblance between the 
ἀνέβη. . . κατέβη, 6 καταβάς... ὁ ἀναβάς in Eph. iv. 9, 10, and the 
declaration οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς 
in John iii. 13 is also noticed. But less can be made of this, as the 
terms in Ephesians are drawn from an OT quotation. Nor can 
much be made either of the contention that what is said of Christ as 
the point of union or restoration for a divided world in Eph. i. 10 is 
essentially the same as the representation of Him as the Λόγος in the 
Prologue to the Fourth Gospel; or of the parallel in such passages 
in John as x. 16, xi. 52, xvii. 20, 21 to the terms in which this Epistle 
enlarges on the inclusion of the Gentiles (ii. 1-22, iii. 6). The more 
relevant of these coincidences, however, may perhaps be taken to 
indicate an acquaintance on the part of the writer of the Fourth 
Gospel with this Epistle. They show at least that the authors of 
these two writings had much in common both in terms and in ideas. 
There are certain points of contact also between Ephesians and 
the Apocalypse, of which much has been made by Holtzmann. 
Minor resemblances are discovered between such passages as Eph. 
i. 8 and Apoc. xiii. 18; Eph. ii. 18 and Apoc. v. 9; Eph. iii. 9 and 
Apoc. iv. 11, x. 6; Eph. iii. 18 and Apoc. xi, 1, xxi. 15-17; Eph. 
y. 32 and Apoc. i. 20. But these are too uncertain and remote to 
trust to. Of more importance are the coincidences between the 
view of Christ’s relation to the Church in Eph. v. 25, etc., and the 
figure of the Church as the Bride of the Lamb in Apoc. xix. 7; the 
mention of the Apostles and prophets in Eph. ii. 20 and Apoc. xxi. 
14; the μυστήριον revealed (ἀπεκαλύφθη) “to His holy Apostles and 
prophets (Eph. iii. 5) and the μυστήριον Θεοῦ in Apoc. x. 7; the μὴ 
συγκοινωνεῖτε τοῖς ἔργοις τοῖς ἀκάρποις Of Eph. v. 11 and the ἵνα μὴ 
συγκοινωνήσητε ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις αὐτῆς Of Apoc. xviii. 4. It cannot be 
said, however, that these amount to much. Few would pronounce 
them sufficient to prove any literary or doctrinal dependence of the 
one writing on the other. Holtzmann, however, infers from them 
that the writer of Ephesians made some use of the Apocalypse. 
Another writing with which Ephesians is thought to be in affinity 
is the Epistle to the Hebrews. Considerable resemblance is found 
between the two in their view of the Person of Christ, ¢.g., in Eph. 
i. 10, 20-22, iv. 8-10, 15 and Heb. i. 8-13, ii. 9, x. 12, 13, etc. The 
seating of Christ on the right hand of God appears in both Epistles 
(Eph. 1. 20; Heb. i. 3, viii. 1, x. 12). So is it also with the use of 
the term παρρησία with reference to access to God (Eph. iii. 12; 
Heb. iv. 16); with the conception of Christ’s work as a sanctifying 
(ἁγιάζειν, Eph. v. 25, 26; Heb. xiii. 12, x. 10); and with the place 


214 INTRODUCTION 


given to the blood of Christ (Eph. i. 7; Heb. ix. 12). In the use of 
terms, too, there are resemblances of some significance. In both we 
have the phrases αἷμα καὶ σάρξ (for the more usual σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα), 
ὑπεράνω πάντων τῶν οὐρανῶν, αἰὼν μέλλων, προσφορὰ καὶ θυσία, eis ἀπολύ- 
τρωσιν. And certain expressive words are found in both, such as 
ἀγρυπνεῖν, κραυγή, ὑπεράνω, βουλή. These things have been supposed 
to point to the priority of Ephesians, while some, on the other hand 
(e.g., von Soden), have regarded them as indicating that Hebrews is . 
the earlier writing. But it would be in the highest degree precarious 
to draw any inference from such data with respect to the chrono- 
logical relation of the one Epistle to the other. 

Of more interest is the connection between our Epistle and 1 
Peter. The points of affinity between these two writings have been ex- 
aggerated, it is true, and conclusions have been drawn from them with 
a confidence which they do not warrant. They undoubtedly deserve 
attention, however, both for their number and for their significance. 
At the same time the lists prepared by Holtzmann and others require 
to be carefully sifted and considerably reduced. Among the more 
relevant coincidences are the following: the place given to hope ; the 
connection of the Christian hope with the resurrection of Christ and 
with the κληρονομία (Eph. i. 18-20; 1 Pet. i. 3-5); the prominence of 
the idea of the Divine power (δύναμις Θεοῦ, Eph. i. 19; 1 Pet. i. 5); 
the mention of the access or introduction (τὴν προσαγωγὴν πρὸς τὸν 
πατέρα, Eph. ii. 18) to God which we have through Christ in the one, 
and the definition of the object of Christ’s sufferings in the other (iva 
ἡμᾶς προσαγάγῃ τῷ Θεῷ, 1 Pet. iii. 18); the mystery hid πρὸ καταβολῆς 
κόσμου in Eph. iii. 9, and the fore-ordination of Christ πρὸ καταβολῆς 
κόσμου in 1 Pet. i. 20, Perhaps of yet greater significance are the 
parallels in idea and in expression with regard to the ascension of 
Christ (Eph. iv. 8-10; 1 Pet. iii. 22); the sesston of Christ at God’s 
right hand in heaven (ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ αὐτοῦ ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις, Eph. i. 
20 ; ὅς ἐστιν ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ Θεοῦ, πορευθεὶς εἰς οὐρανόν, 1 Pet. iii. 22); the 
subjection of all angelic powers to Christ (Eph. i. 21; 1 Pet. iii. 22). 

There are other coincidences to which great importance has 
been attached, but which are of more doubtful relevancy. The most 
striking of these are the analogous statements about the prophets, 
the hiding of the meaning of their prophecies from themselves, and 
the extent of the revelation made to them (1 Pet. i. 10-12; Eph. iii, 
δ, 10). But it is not the same class of prophets that is in view in 
both. In 1 Peter it is the OT prophets; in Ephesians it appears to 
be the NT prophets. The resemblance between Eph. ii. 18-22 and 
1 Pet. ii. 4-6 must be discounted to a considerable extent, because 














INTRODUCTION 215 


both writers are quoting the familiar passage in Ps. cxviii. 22, or have 
its terms in mind. Nor does the coincidence between the opening 
doxologies (1 Pet. i. 3; Eph. 1. 3—in both εὐλογητὸς ὁ Θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ 
τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ) carry us very far. On the other hand 
there are some marked resemblances in syntax and construction, 
especially in the paragraphs immediately following these doxologies. 

On these data very contradictory conclusions have been suspended. 
Some have inferred that the author of Ephesians was a debtor to 
1 Peter (Hilgenfeld, Weiss). Others have taken the author of 1 
Peter to be a borrower from Ephesians. The theory has also been 
broached that both Epistles proceed from one hand, possibly that of 
the writer of Acts and the Third Gospel. Others have explained the 
case by supposing that Peter may have heard Paul in Rome, or that 
there may have been converse between the two Apostles in Rome 
which is reflected in these parallels. So different are the aspects in 
which these things present themselves to different minds. One thing 
at least it is very difficult to imagine. That is, that a writer of the 
genius and power which the Epistle to the Ephesians discloses could 
have been a borrower even from the author of 1 Peter. 

The question of greatest interest, however, is that touching 
the relation between the Epistle to the Ephesians and the Epistle 
to the Colossians. Here the resemblances and the differences 
are equally striking and unmistakable. The general likeness in 
the structure of the two writings arrests attention at once—in the 
division of the matter between the doctrinal and the practical, in the 
form of the paragraphs, and in much of the diction. It is calculated, 
indeed, that in some seventy-eight out of 155 verses we have much 
the same phraseology. Lists have been compiled by De Wette 
and others including the following passages: Eph. i. 4; Col. i. 22: 
Eph. i, 6, 7; Col. i. 13, 14: Eph. i, 10; Col. i. 20: Eph. i. 15-17; 
Col. i. 3,4: Eph. i. 18; Col. i. 27: Eph. i. 21; Col. i. 16: Eph. i. 
22 f.; Col. i. 18 f.: Eph. ii. 1, 12; Col. i. 21: Eph. ii. δ; Col. ii. 13: 
Eph. ii. 15; Col. ii. 14: Eph. ii, 16; Col. ii. 20: Eph. iii, 1; Col. i. 
24: Eph. iii. 2; Col. i. 25: Eph. iii. 3; Col. i. 26: Eph. iii. 7; Col. 
i, 23, 25: Eph. iii, 8 f.; Col. i.27: Eph. iv. 1; Col. i. 10: Eph. iv. 
2; Col. iii. 12 f.: Eph. iv. 3 f.; Col. iii, 14 f: Eph. iv. 15 f.; Col. ii, 
19: Eph. iv. 19; Col. iii, 1,5: Eph. iv. 22 f.; Col. iii. 8 ff.: Eph. 
iv. 25 f.; Col. iii. 8 f.: Eph. iv. 29; Col. iii. 8., iv. 6: Eph. iv. 31; 
Col. iii. 12 f.: Eph. v. 3; Col. iii. 5: Eph. v. 4; Col. iii. 8: Eph. v. 
5; Col. iii, 5: Eph. v. 6; Col. iii. 6: Eph. v.15; Col. iv. 5: Eph. v. 
19 f.; Col. iii. 16 f.: Eph.v. 21; Col. iii. 18: Eph. v. 25; Col. iii. 19: 
Eph. vi. 1; Col. iii. 20: Eph. vi. 4; Col. iii. 21: Eph. vi. 5 ff.; Col. 


216 INTRODUCTION 


iii, 22 ff.: Eph. νι. 9; Col. vi. 1: Eph. vi. 18 ff. ; Col. iv. 2 ff.: Eph. 
vi. 21 f.; Col. iv. 7 f. 

These parallels are by no means all of the same value. Yet with 
all necessary deductions they are remarkable both in number and in 
quality. Taken along with the large resemblance in matter, which 
extends in some parts over considerable sections, they exhibit a re- 
lationship close enough to warrant us to speak of the two as sister 
Epistles. 

It does not follow from this, however, that the one is dependent 
on the other. There are, indeed, important differences between the 
two kindred writings which make it difficult to regard the one as 
made up out of the other. The style is different, that of Ephesians 
being round, full, and rhythmical, where that of Colossians is more 
pointed, logical and concise. The question of the Church has no 
such place in the latter as in the former. The Epistle to the 
Ephesians has much more of an OT colouring than that to the 
Colossians. In the latter we have only one OT quotation or 
allusion. In the former we have eight or nine, viz.: Gen. fi. 24 
(Eph. v. 31); Exod. xx. 12 (Eph. vi. 2); Ps. iv. 4 (Eph. iv. 26) ; Ps. 
viii. 6 (Eph. 1. 22); Ps. Ixviii. 18 (Eph. iv. 8); Ps. cxviii. 22 (Eph. ii. 
20); Song of Songs iv. 7 (Eph. v. 27, perhaps) ; Isa. lvii. 9 (Eph. ii. 
17); Isa. Ix. 1 (Eph. v. 14). There are phrases which are distinctive 
of the Epistle to the Ephesians, but which do not reappear in that 
to the Colossians, ¢.g., τὰ émovpava. And besides all this there are 
whole paragraphs in Ephesians which have nothing like them in 
Colossians—those dealing with the union of Jew and Gentile in the 
one Church of God as the subject of the Divine predestination (Eph. 
i. 3-14); the unity of the faith and of the Church (iv. 5-16); the con- 
trast between the light and the darkness with their corresponding 
results (v. 8-14); the mystery of the marriage-union as a reflection of 
the union between Christ and the Church (v. 22-33); the description 
of the panoply of God (vi. 10-17). And in like manner there are 
whole sections in Colossians, such as the polemical passage in chap. 
ii. and the salutations in chap. v., which have no place in Ephesians. 

The question raised by the co-existence of these likenesses and 
differences has been very variously answered. Some have inferred 
that Colossians must have been the original writing, and that 
Ephesians resembles it at so many points because it has been bor- 
rowed largely from it. Others have regarded Ephesians as the earlier 
and more original composition. The scholar who has gone most 
laboriously into the details of this question, viz., H. J. Holtzmann, 
came to the conclusion that the priority could not be given wholly to 





τ SINE MEISE fi ACI ioe «οὶ 


wae 


στε 





INTRODUCTION 217 


either Epistle, but that there were sections of Ephesians (e.g., i. 4, 
cf. Col. i, 22; i. 6, 7, cf. Col. i. 13, 14; iii. 3, 5, 9, cf Col. i. 26, ii. 2) 
which pointed to the priority of that Epistle, while there were a con- 
siderable number that pointed in the opposite direction. He took 
refuge, therefore, in the complicated theory that Colossians as we 
have it is not the Epistle as it originally was ; that there was a briefer 
Pauline Epistle to the Colossian Church on which the author of the 
Epistle to the Ephesians based his work; that the Colossian Epistle 
was afterwards enlarged by this author ; and that the hand that did 
all this was not Paul’s own, but perhaps that of the writer who added 
the closing doxology to the Epistle to the Romans. 

This is a far-fetched explanation, and one beset by many difficul- 
ties. The terms supposed to have been taken from the Epistle to 
the Colossians come in quite simply and naturally in the sister 
Epistle, but by no means in the same context or connection. The 
most distinctive sections of the Colossian Epistle, those dealing with 
the strange, speculative views of Christ’s person and relations, have 
no place in the Ephesian Epistle, and it is surely a surprising cir- 
cumstance that a borrower such as the compiler of Ephesians is 
supposed to be should have so carefully avoided these things and 
should have appropriated only the least characteristic parts of the 
writing which he chose for the basis of his own communication. 
It is still more surprising that a writer capable of producing the 
Ephesian Epistle should have thought of using another composition | 
in this dependent manner. In point of fact there is nothing in the 
Epistle to the Ephesians, whether of likeness or of unlikeness, that 
may not be accounted for in a far simpler and more natural way. 
A writer addressing himself in two different communications, prepared 
much about the same time, to Churches in the same part of the world, 
not widely separated from each other, with much in common, but 
with something of difference also in their circumstances, their dangers 


and their needs, naturally falls into a style and a tenor of address 


which will be to a considerable extent the same in both writings and 
yet have differences rising naturally out of the different positions. 

5, AUTHORSHIP OF THE EpisTLeE. The historical evidence in favour 
of the Pauline authorship of this Epistle is very strong. We have 
the best reason for saying that by the end of the second century it 
was generally regarded as the work of Paul. There is evidence also 
that it was in circulation by the close of the first century or the 
beginning of the second. The place which it had then, and the use 
which was made of it, also indicate that it was recognised as more 
than an ordinary writing—that it was accepted indeed for what 


218 INTRODUCTION 


it professed to be. In short, in oldest antiquity there is nothing to 
show that the claim which it bore upon its face was questioned, or 
that it was assigned to any other writer than Paul. 

It is possible that within the NT writings themselves we have an 
important indication of the authorship. In Col. iv. 16 mention is 
made of an Epistle “from Laodicea”. If Colossians is accepted as 
what it professes to be, and that Epistle “from Laodicea” can be 
identified, as many hold it can, with our Epistle to the Ephesians, 
we have a very direct witness to the Pauline authorship. But apart 
from that there are things of great interest in relation to the question 
of authorship in very early Christian literature. Even in Clement of 
Rome there are forms of expression which look like echoes of ideas 
and terms characteristic of this Epistle. Thus the phrase ἠνεῴχθησαν 
ἡμῶν ot ὀφθαλμοὶ τῆς καρδίας in chap. 36 recalls Eph. i. 18. The state- 
ment in Eph. i. 4 of our election of God in Christ (καθὼς ἐξελέξατο 
ἡμᾶς ἐν αὐτῷ, etc.) may perhaps be reflected in what is said of Christ 
Himself and us in chap. 64—6 ἐκλεξάμενος τὸν Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν Kat 
ἡμᾶς δι᾿ αὐτοῦ εἰς λαὸν περιούσιον. The paragraph on unity, too, in 
Eph. iv. 4-6 may be reflected in chap. 46---ἢ οὐχὶ ἕνα Θεὸν ἔχομεν καὶ 
ἕνα Χριστόν; καὶ ἕν πνεῦμα τῆς χάριτος τὸ ἐκχυθὲν ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, καὶ μία 
κλῆσις ἐν Χριστῷ. The most that can be said, however, of these 
analogies is that they are suggestive. Still less can be made of 
the witness of the Didaché or of certain passages in the Epistle of 
Barnabas (vi. 15, xix. 7). In the first of these two writings we have 
these two statements which have a general, but only a general, resem- 
blance to Eph. vi. 5, 9, viz., ὑμεῖς δὲ οἱ δοῦλοι ὑποταγήσεσθε τοῖς κυρίοις 
ὑμῶν ὡς τύπῳ Θεοῦ ἐν αἰσχύνῃ καὶ φόβῳ (Did., iv., 11), and οὐκ ἐπιτάξεις 
δούλῳ σου ἢ παιδίσκῃ τοῖς ἐπὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Θεὸν ἐλπίζουσιν, ἐν πικρίᾳ σου. But 
this is all. 

It is different with the testimony of Ignatius. It is claimed 
indeed by some excellent scholars that in one interesting passage 
Ignatius speaks definitely and unmistakably of Paul as the writer 
of an Epistle to the Ephesians. That is the statement in Ep. 
ad Eph., c. 12, Παύλου συμμύσται (ἐστε) τοῦ ἡγιασμένου . . . ὃς ἐν 
πάσῃ ἐπιστολῇ μνημονεύει ὑμῶν ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. The difficulty attach- 
ing to the interpretation of the second clause is seen perhaps 
in certain ancient variations of reading—in the substitution of μνη- 
μονεύω in the Armenian Version, and in the amplification ὃς πάντοτε 
ἐν ταῖς δεήσεσιν αὐτοῦ μνημονεύει ὑμῶν which it receives in the longer 
form of Ignatius. In order to make it carry the inference drawn 
from it the rendering “in all the Epistle” or “in every part of the 
Epistle to you” must be given it. But, not to speak of the inept 








1 





INTRODUCTION 219 


meaning that would thus be the result, it is very doubtful whether 
that rendering can be accepted as grammatically justifiable. None 
of the few instances which are adduced in support of the contention 
that was without the article can mean “the whole” can be said to be 
free of doubt. Some; ¢.g., πᾶσα Ἱεροσόλυμα (Matt. ii. 3), πᾶς Ἰσραήλ 
(Rom. xi. 26), are not pertinent, inasmuch as the nouns are proper 
names. Others are almost equally doubtful for other reasons, e.g., 
ἐπὶ παντὸς προσώπου τῆς γῆς (Acts xvii. 26), where the phrase πρόσωπον 
τῆς γῆς has much the force of a proper name, there being only one 
such thing. The same in effect is the case with wav σῶμα in a passage 
of Aristotle which has been very confidently appealed to, viz., δεῖ τὸν 
πολιτικὸν εἰδέναι πῶς τὰ περὶ Puxis* ὥσπερ καὶ Tov ὀφθαλμοὺς θεραπεύοντα, 
καὶ πᾶν σῶμα (Eth, Nic., i., 18, 7). Por σῶμα is used there not in the 
sense of any particular body, but in that of body as distinguished from 
soul, If the sentence must be translated in accordance with the 
stated force of πᾶς in conjunction with an anarthrous noun, viz., as = 
“in every letter,” it cannot safely be concluded that Ignatius had in his 
mind a particular Epistle of St. Paul’s known to be addressed to the 
Ephesians. It would be strange, indeed, as Professor Abbott remarks 
(ut sup., p. xi), that if Ignatius wished to remind the Ephesians of 
Paul’s regard for them he should “ only refer to the mention of them 
in other Epistles, and not at all to that which had been specially 
addressed to them”. But allowing this contested passage to stand 
aside, we find Ignatius elsewhere using words or phrases which 
appear to indicate an acquaintance with characteristic expressions in 
our Epistle, such as πλήρωμα, προορίζεσθαι, ἐκλέγειν, θέλημα τοῦ Πατρός, 
λίθοι ναοῦ πατρός, ἡτοιμασμένοι εἰς οἰκοδομὴν Θεοῦ πατρός (chap. ix.; cf, 
Eph. ii, 20-22), μιμηταὶ ὄντες τοῦ Θεοῦ (chap. i. ; cf. Eph. v. 1). 

The witness of Polycarp, Hermas and Hippolytus is also of some 
significance. In Polycarp we have two passages which have all the 
appearance of quotations from our Epistle or reminiscences of its 


terms, viz.: χάριτί ἐστε σεσωσμένοι, οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων (Ep. ad Philipp., 


chap. i.; cf. Eph. ii. 5, 8,9); and (in the Latin form, the Greek not 
being extant) “ ut his scripturis dictum est, ivascimini et nolite peccare 
et sol non occidat super iracundiam vestram” (chap. xii.; ¢f. Eph. iv. 
26). In Hermas, not to mention other sentences which are less 
definite, we have these—pnde λύπην ἐπάγειν τῷ πνεύματι τῷ σεμνῷ καὶ 
ἀληθεῖ (Mand. ; cf. Eph. iii. 30); and ἔσονται εἰς ἕν πνεῦμα καὶ ἕν σῶμα 
(Sim., ix., 13; cf. Eph. iv. 4, 5). From Hippolytus we gather that 
Eph. iii. 4-18 was quoted as γραφή by the Valentinians (Philos., vi., 34). 

The judgments of scholars have differed and no doubt will con- 
tinue to differ as to the relevancy and the value of these testimonies. 


220 INTRODUCTION 


But with Irenzus at least and the Muratorian Canon we reach 
sure and indisputable ground. Irenzeus refers to Paul by name 
as the author of our Epistle and quotes it as his. He cites Eph. 
v. 13 as words of Paul (Adv. Her., i., 8,5); and he expresses himself 
thus—xdOws 6 μακάριος Παῦλός φησιν ἐν τῇ πρός ᾿Εφεσίους ἐπιστολῇ " ὅτι 
μέλη ἐσμὲν τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ, ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ καὶ τῶν ὀστέων αὐτοῦ 
(Adv. Her., ν., 2, 3; cf. Eph. v. 30), The Muratorian Canon 
mentions the Ephesians as one of the Churches to which Paul 
wrote Epistles. The testimony of Clement of Alexandria is like 
that of Irenzus. Thus, after citing 2 Cor. xi. 2 as an injunction 
of the Apostle’s (ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστέλλων πρὸς Κορινθίους φησίν), he 
introduces Eph. iv. 13-15 in these terms—cadéotata δὲ ᾿ἘΕφεσίοις 
γράφων .. . λέγων pexpl καταντήσωμεν οἱ πάντες εἰς τὴν ἑνότητα τῆς 
πίστεως, κιτιλ. (Paed., i., 18). In the same way he quotes 1 Cor. 
xi. 3 and Gal. v. 16 ff. as words of Paul (φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος), and 
proceeds thus—8d καὶ ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἐφεσίους γράφει - ὑποτασσόμενοι 
ἀλλήλοις ἐν φόβῳ Θεοῦ, etc., as in Eph. v. 21-25 (Stvom., iv., 65), 
The testimony of Marcion is to the same effect, although he gave 
the Epistle the title “ad Laodicenos” (Tert., Adv. Marc., v., 17); 
while Tertullian, his opponent, mentions Ephesus among the Churches 
that had original, apostolic Epistles, and corrects Marcion only on 
the matter of the destination—Ecclesiae quidem veritate epistolam 
istam ad Ephesios habemus emissam, non ad Laodicenos (Adv, 
Marc., v., 17). And from the latter part of the second century the 
stream of testimony to the fact that the Epistle was recognised as 
Paul’s flows steadily on. 

Notwithstanding the strength of the external testimony, however, 
there have been not a few in modern times, from Schleiermacher 
and Usteri on to the present day, who have doubted or denied the 
Pauline authorship. Among these De Wette, Baur and Holtz- 
mann occupy a conspicuous place. It is to be observed, however, 
that some who have most strenuously questioned the genuineness of 
the Epistle still admit it to be of very early date—as early as a.p. 75 
or 80. De Wette, ¢.g., allows it to be a product of the Apostolic age, 
the work indeed of some highly gifted scholar of the Apostle’s, and 
Ewald’s position is something similar. Others take up an indeter- 
minate position. The conclusion of Jiilicher, ¢.g., is that the Pauline 
authorship can neither be certainly accepted nor absolutely denied, 

The arguments leading up to the doubt or denial of the genuine- 
ness of the Epistle are based upon internal considerations—style, 
language, peculiar usages, the nature of the ideas, etc. Thus De 
Wette regards the composition as unlike Paul’s way of writing—in its 








SL ΒΡῈ 





INTRODUCTION 221 


want of connection and its many parentheses, in much of its phrase- 
ology, and in the poverty of its contents. To him it is a composition 
copious in words but poor in ideas, lacking originality, so dependent 
indeed on the Epistle to the Colossians as to look like a “verbose 
amplification ” of it, the work not of Paul himself but of an imitator. 
But the similarities between Ephesians and Colossians, as we have 
seen, admit of a simple explanation, and it is a surprising judgment, 
one that few certainly will accept, which De Wette pronounces on 
our Epistle when he speaks of it as having no distinctive character, 
as a dependent production, and non-Pauline in style. We should 
rather say with Meyer that it is so like Paul in tone, tenor and 
much else as to make it hard indeed to imagine that it can be the 
work of a mere imitator; all the more so if it is, as De Wette thinks 
it, without any special object. 

Baur, Schwegler, and other adherents of the Tiibingen School 
dilate chiefly on its doctrinal character as inconsistent with the Paul- 
ine authorship. They find it full of Gnostic and Montanist thought 
and terminology. They lay stress on the use of such terms as πλήρωμα, 
on the peculiarities of the Christology, etc., and judge it to be the 
product of the second century, when Gnostic speculations had taken 
shape and had become familiar. But this view of the Epistle is no 
longer asserted with the former confidence or in the pronounced 
form in which it was elaborated by Baur himself. It is acknowledged 
more generally now that the phenomena in the Epistle on which the 
old Tubingen School fastened may be accounted for by the operation 
of ideas which were in affinity with those known as Gnostic, but which 
came short of the developed Gnosticism of the middle of the second 
century ; and further that the passages most insisted on by Baur, 
when fairly interpreted, are quite consistent with the form of doctrine 
found in the primary Pauline Epistles. 

The objections most generally urged against the Pauline author- 


ship take the following forms. In the first place the vocabulary of 


the Epistle, it is said, presents great difficulty. The ἅπαξ λεγόμενα 
are thought to be so numerous and of such a kind as to raise a 
very serious question. But when the list is examined the case is 
considerably modified. The whole number of words which are found 
in this Epistle and nowhere else in the NT is forty-two. The number 
of words found in this Epistle and occasionally elsewhere in the canon- 
ical books, but in none of the other writings generally recognised as 
Pauline by the critics in question, is thirty-nine, according to the 
reckoning of Holtzmann. But the Epistle to the Colossians and 
the three Pastoral Epistles are left out of account in.this computa- 


222 INTRODUCTION 


tion, and at the most the number of these ἅπαξ λεγόμενα is not 
proportionately greater than in some of the acknowledged Pauline 
Epistles. In Galatians, e.g., there are thirty-three words used 
only there and nowhere else in the NT; in Philippians there are 
forty-one; in 2 Corinthians there are ninety-five ; while in Romans 
there are no less than one hundred and in 1 Corinthians one hundred 
and eighty. Further, some of these terms, ¢.g., those belonging to 
the description of the panoply of God in chap. vi., are obviously the 
products of the figure or the occasion. Some, again, are but single 
occurrences, and in the case of several there are related forms found 
in others of the Epistles. or example, καταρτίζω, κατάρτισις, ὁσίως, 
mpookaptepeww appear elsewhere, though καταρτισμός, ὁσιότης, προσκαρ- 
τέρησις happen to be used only in Ephesians. 

In the second place it is objected that there are certain Pauline 
words which get a new sense in this Epistle. Instances of this 
are alleged to be found in such terms as μυστήριον, οἰκονομία, περιποί- 
nots. But with respect to the first of these the only passage in 
which it can be said to have anything like a novel application is 
v. 32. In the other four occurrences it is used in reality very much 
as it is used elsewhere by Paul. The term οἰκονομία, again, as it is 
handled in this Epistle, has the same general sense of stewardship 
as it has in 1 Cor, ix. 17, though with a different application. And 
if περιποίησις, which has the abstract sense in 1 Thess. v. 9, 2 Thess. 
ii. 14, has to be understood as concrete here in chap. i. 14, that is a 
variation which appears in the use of other terms in the Pauline 
writings and elsewhere. 

In the third place it is objected that in this Epistle certain ideas 
are expressed by terms which differ from those employed by Paul 
elsewhere for the same purpose. To this class are sometimes 
reckoned such words and phrases as ἀγαπᾶν τὸν Κύριον, ἀγαπᾶν τὴν 
ἐκκλησίαν, δίδοναί twa ti, ἀγαθὸς πρός τι, δέσμιος, ἴστε γινώσκοντες, εἰς 
πάσας τὰς γενεὰς τοῦ αἰῶνος τῶν αἰώνων, πρὸ καταβολῆς τοῦ κόσμου, σωτήριον, 
αἱ διάνοιαι, τὰ θελήματα, πνεῦμα τοῦ νοός. Little need be said of 
peculiarities of this kind. Some of them have their explanation in 
the nature of the subject or in simple variety in style and ex- 
pression.- Others have affinities elsewhere in the Pauline writings. 
How varied, ¢.g., is Paul’s way of speaking of understanding, spirit, 
etc. Is a writer like St. Paul to be shut up to the same stereo- 
typed forms of expression in one writing after another? Is he to 
be debarred from using the word ἀγαπᾶν with reference to Christ 
or to the Church in this Epistle, merely because in other Epistles 
he uses it with regard to God? And is it impossible for him to 








INTRODUCTION 223 


address his hearers as τέκνα ἀγαπητά when the imitation of God is 
in view, because elsewhere he may use that designation with regard 
to their relations to himself Ὁ 

Some of the instances most commonly cited, however, deserve 
more attention. There is, ¢.g., the use of φωτίζειν in iii. 9, in application 
to the Apostle’s commission to enlighten or instruct. This, it is urged, 
is an application of the word not found elsewhere in the Pauline writ- 
ings. But that might be the case and yet its use here might have its 
justification. The reading is not certain. The question is whether 
πάντας Should be inserted or not. If it is omitted, then the aspect of 
the question is changed. If it is inserted, there are analogies to this 
use of φωτίζειν in the LXX (Jud. xiii. 8; 2 Kings xii. 2, xvii. 27, 28), and 
Paul may have followed these. There is again the designation of God 
as ὃ Θεὸς τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (i. 17). This indeed is a rare 
designation, and for that very reason one most unlikely to have 
been used by a forger or a mere imitator. But it is a designation 
perfectly consistent with the highest view of Christ’s Person, and 
one which has its justification in Christ’s own words, as recorded 
in the Fourth Gospel (John xx. 17). The phrase τὰ ἐπουράνια, 
which is used five times in this Epistle and, as it seems, with the 
local sense, is confined, it is true, to this one writing among all 
those attributed to Paul. But the adjective, ἐπουράνιος, in the sense 
of heavenly, is used also in 1 Cor. xv. 40, 48, 49; Phil. ii. 10. 1 
is difficult to see why Paul should not be thought at liberty to use 
or even to coin such a phrase, or why he might not select the 
term τὰ πνευματικά instead of τὰ πνεύματα in the large and special 
sense which it has in this Epistle. Why, too, should it be thought 
that a word like κοσμοκράτωρ, or a phrase like ὁ ἄρχων τῆς ἐξουσίας τοῦ 
ἀέρος, SO appropriate to the ideas in hand, must be alien to Paul? 
So is it also with the word διάβολος which meets us in this Epistle, 
while in others, it is said, Paul speaks only of Σατανᾶς. But διάβολος 
is also used in 1 and 2 Tim. The two words indeed are practically 
the same in sense. They are employed interchangeably by other 
NT writers, e.g., the authors of the Fourth Gospel and the Book of 
Acts. Why should a writer of the power and the versatility of Paul 
be tied down to the use of one of these words in all his writings, 
later as well as earlier? There remains the phrase of which perhaps 
most has been made, τοῖς ἁγίοις ἀποστόλοις καὶ προφήταις. This, it is 
said, smacks of the later period when men’s thoughts of the Apostles 
-and the prophets of the NT Church had changed. Its use here has 
been felt to be such a difficulty by some that they have tried to 
dispose of it as a gloss or as a case of dislocation in the text. But 


224 INTRODUCTION 


there is nothing so very strange in this application of the term ἅγιος 
if we give the word the broad sense which is its proper sense, and 
which it has indeed in the very same context in the phrase ἐμοὶ τῷ 
ἐλαχιστοτέρῳ πάντων ἁγίων (111. 8). 

In the fourth place serious objection is taken to the Pauline 
authorship on the ground of what is held to be the un-Pauline type 
of thought which appears again and again in the Epistle. It is said, 
é.g., that the question of the inclusion of Few and Gentile in one 
Church is presented in a different light from that in which it is seen 
in other Pauline Epistles. Only here, it is said, is it put before us as 
the great object or, at least, a primary object of Christ’s work and of 
the Divine predestination (ii. 13-18, 19-22, iii, 5, etc., iv. 7-16); and 
what is more, it is introduced simply as a matter of revelation and 
not as a thing over which there had been sharp controversy. It is 
certainly a remarkable place that is given in this Epistle to the 
thought of the unity of the Church and the perfect equality of Jew 
and Gentile within it. But there is no contradiction between this 
way of looking at the inclusion of the Gentiles and that which 
prevails in the other Epistles. The statement is in harmony with the 
general disposition of the Epistle, which is to carry all things back 
to the eternal will and purpose of God. The controversy, moreover, 
was ended, and Paul had no occasion to revive the memory of it in 
the message needed by those whom he addresses here. 

The view , again, which is given of the Law in this Epistle is 
thought to be singular. The Law is not exhibited, it is said, as 
having any real moral value or religious use, but as having simply a 
typical significance and as the cause of enmity and separation be- 
tween Jew and Gentile. And Circumcision itself, it is added, is 
presented as a merely formal thing, and contemptuous words are 
spoken of it (ἡ λεγομένη περιτομή, ii. 11) which would come strangely 
from Paul, himself a circumcised Jew and one who elsewhere 
attaches religious value to circumcision and says good things of it, 
But where he had for his special subject the oneness of Jew and 
Gentile as effected by Christ and as seen in the Church, it was matter 
of course that he should speak particularly of the dividing effect of 
the Law as it was witnessed in the pre-Christian times. And he does 
not speak elsewhere of the Law only in one way. He has very 
different things to say of it according to circumstances; and he 
presents it in aspects which seem even contradictory, speaking of 
it, as he does, now as holy (Rom, vii. 9) and again as incompetent 
(Rom. viii. 3); now as a παιδαγωγὸς εἰς Χριστόν (Gal. iti. 25) and 
again as carrying a curse (κατάρα) and condemnation with it (Gal, 


OOS ti ere Deda 


Pe σι - Ὁ 


alte, Nl i re, 











INTRODUCTION 225 


li. 10). And the same is true of the ways in which circumcision is 
regarded in the Pauline Epistles: cf. Rom. ii. 26-29, iii. 1; Gal. v. 6, 
vi. 15; Phil. iii, 5; Col. ii. 11, 13, etc. 

A very different position, too, is thought to be given to the 
Death of Christ in this Epistle from what it has in the acknowledged 
Pauline writings. In Epistles like those to the Romans, the Gal- 
atians and the Corinthians its expiatory and propitiatory value is 
the theme on which Paul dwells with most emphasis. But here 
this is passed over in silence, and comparatively little is made of 
the Death of Christ even in other aspects. It is rather His exalta- 
tion with all that it involves that is dwelt on. But the difference, so 
far as it exists, is due to the occasion and to the state of those 
addressed. It is true that it is as the means by which the reconcili- 
ation of Jew and Gentile is effected that the Cross is specially 
mentioned (ii. 16), and it is with reference to the imitation of God 
that Christ’s giving of Himself is described as an offering and a 
sacrifice to God. But there is nothing in this to make it impossible 
to suppose that the same author, writing with an eye on other con- 
ditions, might speak of the Cross and the Death of Christ in connec- 
tion with the reconciliation of the world or of the individual. More- 
over, we have here the blood of Christ, redemption through His blood, 
and the forgiveness of sins as related to His blood—all which are 
distinctly Pauline, if they are also Johannine, terms and ideas (i. 7, 
ii. 13). 

Further, this Epistle is alleged to depart widely from the recog- 
nised Pauline Epistles in its Christology, its doctrine of Christ’s 
Headship, and its view of the Parousia. With regard to the first of 
these particulars this Epistle is more in affinity with that to the 
Colossians than with any other, in so far as it exhibits Christ in His 
largest relations to creation, and presents Him as designed in the 
eternal purpose of God to be the bond of union or reunion for a 
world existing at present in a condition of dislocation and division. 
_ But there are at least the rudiments and foretokens of this doctrine of 
_ Christ’s cosmical relations elsewhere. There is, ¢.g., the statement of 
the “one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,” in 1 Cor. viii. 6; 


"ἢ _ and there is the larger analogy in the great paragraph on the Evangel 


of Creation in Rom. viii. 19-20. It may be, again, that in other Pauline 
passages the body is said to be as Christ (1 Cor. xii. 12) or be in Christ 
(Rom. xii. 4, 5), and the head is reckoned simply among the members 


ΩΝ (1 Cor. xii. 21); whereas here, as in Colossians, believers are the 


᾿ς members, Christ is the Head, and the Church is the body. But the 


different applications of these figures have their sufficient explana- 





VOL. III. 15 


226 INTRODUCTION 


tion in the different subjects. In the present case the subject is 
the relation between Christ and the Church; in the others it is the 
relation between the members of the Church themselves. And as 
regards the Parousia, the assertion is that, instead of looking, as Paul 
does elsewhere, to that great event as the near and certain con- 
clusion of the world’s end and the consummation of the Kingdom of 
God, the writer of this Epistle views the future as made up of a series 
of ages following one upon the other. But this overlooks the con- 
sideration that the αἰῶνες ἐπερχόμενοι may be those that are to make 
up the Eternity which opens after the Second Coming. The fact 
remains, however, that the Parousia does not occupy the place 
which it has in such Epistles as those to the Thessalonians, and 
that there is nothing to show that it fills the writer’s vision here 
as it does there. But this Epistle is separated by years from those 
earliest writings attributed to Paul. Much had taken place in the 
interval; the Return of Christ had not been witnessed, but the 
Kingdom of God had been seen establishing itself far and wide by 
the preaching of the Gospel. Even in the Second Epistle to the 
Thessalonians it is recognised that the Parousia cannot enter until 
certain things have happened; and in the further experience of God’s 
ways as regards the times and the seasons, the Second Coming, 
though the expectation of it was not lost, came to be regarded as a 
less immediately impending event. 

Finally, it is affirmed that this Epistle differs essentially from the 
acknowledged Pauline writings in its view of the Church, and that 
in more than one respect. It is singular, it is said, in speaking of 
the Church as one, and it gives a view of the Church which could 
not have emerged till a considerably later date than that to which 
Ephesians must be assigned if it is by Paul. To this it is enough to 
reply first that there is nothing in the Epistle to point to a highly 
developed condition of the Church. The organisation of the Church 
is not one of the subjects dealt with. The gifts bestowed upon the 
Church are brought into view, and are shown to be of various kinds. 
But they are not such as infer a comparatively late period. There 
is no mention of rule by bishops and deacons, nor does the external 
unity of the Church form a feature of this Epistle. The view which 
is given of the Church as one is indeed the highest found in the 
Pauline writings. But it is not wholly new. It has its foundations at 
least in earlier Pauline writings, as, ¢.g., in 1 Cor, xii. 28 (ἔθετο ὁ Θεὸς 
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους, etc.) ; xv. 9 (διότι ἐδίωξα τὴν ἐκκλησίαν 
τοῦ Θεοῦ) ; Gal. i. 18 (ἐδίωκον τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ) ; Phil. iii. Θ (διώκων 
τὴν ἐκκλησίαν) ; cf. in the Book of Acts (the composition of a Pauline 





INTRODUCTION 227 


writer), τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ [Κυρίου] ἣν περιεποιήσατο διὰ τοῦ αἵματος 
αὐτοῦ, xx. 28. In the sister Epistle, too, the term ἐκκλησία is used 
both of the local Church and of the universal (i, 18, 24, iv. 15, 16). 
But, apart from that, the unity is a spiritual unity, a oneness which 
consists in the union of individuals, the ἅγιοι, in faith—not the unity 
of a corporation or an organisation. There is nothing in this im- 
portant section of the teaching of the Epistle to make it necessary 
to suppose that it was written at a time when the multitude of 
separate local Churches were driven by the needs of defence to 
form themselves into one large, strong organisation. 

In none of these particulars in which this Epistle is asserted to 
stand apart is there any essential difference between it and the 
acknowledged Pauline Epistles. There are differences, but they are 
differences which admit in each case of a natural explanation, and | 
which in no case amount to anything that is incompatible with the 
recognised Pauline doctrine. On the other hand, as scholars like 
Jilicher frankly admit, we find in this Epistle many distinctive 
Pauline ideas, turns of expression, and qualities of style—the use of 
characteristic terms not found elsewhere in the NT, of particles like 
διό, dpa οὖν, etc.; of ideas like that of the Divine riches, etc., as well 
as the broad lines of Pauline doctrine. Allowing all reasonable 
weight to the internal considerations, of which so much is made, 
they come far short of balancing the strong and consistent argument 


a ἥ provided by the historical testimony to the Pauline authorship. 





6. THe DEsTINATION OF THE EpistLe. The traditional view is 
that the Epistle was addressed to the Ephesian Church—to that 
Church definitely and by itself. This view has still the support of 


some important authorities. In modern times, however, it has come 


i 


3 br i to be largely held that the Epistle is an Encyclical letter, meant not 








for the Ephesian Church specifically, but for a number of Churches, 
or rather for the Christian people found in the Roman Province of 


_ Asia, or more particularly in the Phrygian territory. The question 
_ is—Which of these two views of the destination of the Epistle best 


satisfies the data at our disposal, internal and external? 
At first the case for the traditional view seems to be far stronger 


than the other, especially on the side of the historical testimony. 


Here much depends on how the reading ἐν ’Eéow in the inscription is 


_ regarded. The textual question is not by any means the only element 
in the case. But it is an important element, and the facts which 


come into view are of great interest. They are also plain and indis- 
putable. First there is the fact that all manuscripts, both uncial and 


cursive, with the exception of three, have the words ἐν ’Epéow in the 


228 INTRODUCTION 


opening verse. There is the second fact that all manuscripts, so far 
as known to us, without any exception have had this express note of 
destination in the inscription at one time or other. There is the third 
fact that the description of the intended readers as the saints in 
Ephesus is found in all the ancient Versions. And in addition to this 
we have the fact that everywhere the title of the Epistle bears that it 
is addressed to the Ephesians. These things make their impression. 
They are taken by so high an authority as Meyer to mean that the en- 
tire ancient Church (Marcion being discounted), from the Muratorian 
Canon (somewhere about a.p. 180), Irenzeus, Clement of Alexandria 
and Tertullian, held the Epistle to be addressed to the Ephesians. 

The argument from historical testimony in favour of the retention 
of “in Ephesus” in the inscription is also supported by such con- 
siderations as these—that in the Epistles generally acknowledged to 
be by Paul the readers in view are definitely designated, even when 
the Apostle is not writing to the Christians of a single Church or city 
(Gal. i. 2; 1 Cor. i. 1; 2 Cor. i. 1); that if ἐν ᾿Ἐφέσῳ is omitted, the 
letter becomes a circular letter “ without any limitation whatever of 
locality or nationality,” as Meyer puts it, and that this does not fit in 
either with the declared mission of Tychicus (vi. 21), or with what is 
said in such passages as i. 15, ii. 11, iii. 1, iv. 17, etc. It is further 
urged that in every other case in which Paul makes use of the phrase 
τοῖς οὖσιν in an inscription, he attaches to it the name of the city 
or territory to which the readers belong (as in Rom., Cor., Phil.), 
and that without ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ the τοῖς οὖσιν does not admit of a sense 
that is adequate or even natural. It may be added that some think 
there is an allusion to the world-famed temple of Diana at Ephesus 
in chap. ii. It is also strongly argued that it is incredible that no 
letter should have been addressed by Paul to a Church like this with 
which he had so many intimate connections, and which was of such 
importance in the fulfilment of his mission. The case as thus stated 
seems well-nigh concluded. 

But there is another side to it. The arguments last mentioned 
are obviously of the most precarious kind. There are other Churches 
with which Paul had very close connections, but which have no letter 
specifically addressed to them among all the Pauline writings that 
have come down to us. If there is an allusion to any particular 
temple in chap. ii. it might be that of Jerusalem rather than that of 
Ephesus. The phrase τοῖς οὖσιν may be construed satisfactorily, 
as we Shall see (cf. Notes on i. 1), even if ἐν Ἐφέσῳ is omitted. The 
letter may be a circular letter of another kind than that supposed 
by Meyer to be indicated by the contents. And there may be a 








INTRODUCTION 229 


sufficient reason for Paul’s departure in this case from his usual 
habit of designating by their locality the readers he addresses. 

But it is of more importance to see how different an aspect the 
textual question assumes when it is more closely examined. For 
the weighty fact presents itself that the words ἐν ᾿εφέσῳ are not 
found in our two oldest and best manuscripts, $B. They have also 
been struck out of cursive 67 by a second hand which may have some 
affinity with B. This is a fact of essential importance in view of 
what these two great uncials have been proved to be in respect of 
value as wellas age. It is reinforced by transcriptional probability, 
it being far less likely that a local designation so much in Paul’s 
way, if it belonged to the original text, should have been dropped out 
or deleted by a succession of scribes than that, not forming part of 
the original inscription, it should have been inserted by later hands. 
Nor can the witness of the ancient Versions outweigh this textual 
evidence. For, important as that witness is, it is the witness of 
documents, the extant manuscripts of which are not equal in an- 
tiquity to the Greek uncials. 

But the textual case does not end here. It is supported by 
Patristic testimony of great significance. From Tertullian we learn 
that Marcion and his followers spoke of the Epistle as addressed to 
the Laodicenes. The relevant passages are these two: (1) Praetereo 
hic et de alia epistola, quam nos ad Ephesios praescriptam habemus, 
haeretici vero ad Laodicenos (Adv, Marc., v., 11); and (2) Ecclesiae 
quidem veritate epistolam istam ad Ephesios habemus emissam, non 
ad Laodicenos, sed Marcion ei titulum aliquando interpolare gestiit 
quasi et in isto diligentissimus explorator ; nihil autem de titulis 
interest, cum ad omnes apostolus scripserit, dum ad quosdam (7b. 17). 
In face of this statement it is difficult indeed to suppose that Marcion 
could have had the words ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ in his text. 

Then it appears from what is reported of Origen’s commentary 
that he, too, had not the words in his text. The passage runs thus : 
Ὠριγένης δέ φησι, ἐπὶ μόνων ᾿Εφεσίων εὕρομεν κείμενον τὸ “τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς 
οὖσι," καὶ ζητοῦμεν εἰ μὴ παρέλκει προσκείμενον τὸ “τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς οὖσι" 
τί δύναται σημαίνειν - ὅρα οὖν εἰ μὴ ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ ᾿Εξόδῳ ὄνομά φησιν ἑαυτοῦ 
ὁ χρηματίζων Μωσεῖ τὸ ὥν, οὕτως οἱ μετέχοντες τοῦ ὄντος, γίνονται ὄντες, 
καλούμενοι οἱονεὶ ἐκ τοῦ μὴ εἶναι εἰς τὸ εἶναι, “ἐξελέξατο γὰρ ὁ Θεὸς τὰ 
μὴ ὄντα " φησὶν ὁ αὐτὸς Παῦλος, “ἵνα τὰ ὄντα καταργήσῃ," etc. (Cramer, 
Catena). Here Origen states distinctly that the phrase was without 
ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ, and that this was peculiar to the case of Ephesians; and 
he proposes a particular way of getting a suitable meaning out of 
the phrase, giving it a metaphysical sense. 


230 INTRODUCTION 


Further, as regards Tertullian, from the passages already quoted, 
it may be inferred with much probability that he, as well as Marcion, 
did not have ἐν Ἐφέσῳ in his text. For it is of the ¢itle that he 
speaks, and what he charges Marcion with falsifying is not the 
text itself but the title. If he had had the words ἐν ᾿εφέσῳ in the 
text he would surely have appealed to that in refuting Marcion. But 
instead of that he appeals to the veritas ecclesiae. 

Then we have a statement of great importance made by Basil. 
It is as follows: τοῖς Ἐφεσίοις ἐπιστέλλων, ds γνησίως ἡνωμένοιῳ τῷ ὄντι 
δι᾿ ἐπιγνώσεως ὄντας αὐτοὺς ἰδιαζόντως ὠνόμασεν, εἰπών - τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς 
οὖσι καὶ πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ " οὕτω γὰρ καὶ οἱ πρὸ ἡμῶν παραδεδώκασι 
καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐν τοῖς παλαιοῖς τῶν ἀντιγράφων εὑρήκαμεν (Adv. Eunom.,, 11.» 
19). Here Basil is obviously referring to the ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ ; not, as some 
painfully endeavour to make out, to the rots or to the οὖσι. In doing 
so he gives us to understand that the local designation was absent, 
and his statement is the more important because he speaks not only 
of the ancient copies themselves, but also of the tradition of the 
men who were before him, and describes the clause as being in both 
cases simply τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς οὖσι καὶ πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. 

There are other witnesses that are considered to speak to the same 
effect. But they are less certain and at the best only of subordinate 
importance. There is astatement by Jerome to the following effect : 
Quidam curiosius quam necesse est putant ex eo quod Moysi dictum 
sit ‘‘ Haec dices filiis Israel: qui est misit me,” etiam eos qui Ephesi 
sunt sancti et fideles essentiae vocabulo nuncupatos. ... Alii vero 
simpliciter non ad eos gui sint, sed ad eos qui Ephesi sancti et fideles 
sint, scriptum arbitrantur (On Eph. i. 1; vol. vii., p. 545). In this 
Jerome seems to refer to Origen and his interpretation of τοῖς οὖσι, 
and to the peculiar reading. But it is at least possible, as Meyer 
takes it, that the words cos qui Ephesi sunt sancti et fideles may re- 
present τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ καὶ πιστοῖς ; Or it may be, as 
others, ¢.g., Alford, think, that Jerome is dealing only with two pos- 
sible interpretations of τοῖς οὖσιν, without saying anything to imply 
that the words ἐν ’Epéow were absent from the inscription. 

There is, however, something to notice in the case of certain 
Latin commentators. In some of these the inscription is dealt 
with in a way that suggests either that they had not the word 
Ephesi in the copies they followed, or that it occupied a different 
place. Thus Ambrosiater passes over the word Ephesi in his com- 
ment—non solum fidelibus scribit, sed et sanctis: ut tunc vere 
fideles sint, si fuerint sancti in Christo Jesu. Victorinus Afer’s 
statement points to a different arrangement of the words—sed haec 


FoR aS Llp yg RC απ Ψ ΘΝ = 4 





Λ ——— ἢ ite ᾿ 
"ἘΦ ΎΘΥ ν᾿ lil th ΘΝ OO BE ete Bea Mat A Ota he ΟΝ 





_ Repeeae 


a i ee Oe 


INTRODUCTION 231 


cum dicit “ Sanctis qui sunt fidelibus Ephesi” quid adjungitur? ‘In 
Christo Jesu” (Mai, Script. Vet. nova Collect., iii., p. 87). Atamuch 
later period Sedulius Scotus also comments on the passage thus: 
Sanctis. Non omnibus Ephesiis, sed his quicreduntin Christo. Et 
fidelibus. Omnes sancti fideles sunt, non omnes fidefes sancti, etc. 
Qui sunt in Christo Jesu. Plures fideles sunt sed non in Christo, 
etc. (cf. Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, pp. 384, 385, and Abbott, ut supra, 
however, lies with NB and the testimonies of Marcion, Origen and 
Basil. It amounts to this, that there is no evidence that the words 
ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ formed part of the Greek text of the first three centuries. 
It is not till we come to the latter half. of the fourth century that 
we have any certain indication of the local designation being included 
in the inscription, and that indication is found in Basil’s implied dis- 
tinction between the ancient copies (τοῖς παλαιοῖς τῶν ἀντιγράφων) and 
others. : 

But the question does not terminate there. The character of the 
Epistle itself and the relations between Paul and the Ephesian Church 
form weighty elements in the case. Everything goes to show how 
intimate these relations were, how peculiar was the place that this 
Church had in the Apostle’s heart, how much it was his care. Not 
only was he the founder of the Church of Ephesus, but he spent 


- some three years preaching and teaching in the city. During that 


long residence his interest in his Ephesian converts was so keen and 
anxious and his labours in their behalf so great that he describes 
himself as “ ceasing not to warn every one day and night with tears” 
(Acts xx. 31). Various things that are mentioned or alluded to in 
his Epistles indicate how constantly he had them in his mind. And 
the farewell which he took of their elders at Miletus is among the 
most pathetic passages of the NT. On his side there were words of 
tender solicitude and loving warning; on theirs thankfulness, affection, 
an emotion so profound that they “fell on his neck and kissed him, 
sorrowing most of all for the words which he spake, that they should 
see his face no more”. It is difficult to suppose that Paul could 
have written a letter intended specifically for this Church without 
giving some indication of what it was to him personally, without some 
reference to what he had done for it and the grateful response which 
his labours had found in it, without letting his feeling towards its 
members express itself in some form. 

Yet this Epistle is in all these respects a singularly neutral com- 
position, without the personal note that makes itself felt in such 
Epistles as those to Corinth and Philippi, with nothing to say about 


232 INTRODUCTION 


any individual but the bearer of the letter, with nothing to connect it 
with the particular locality, with little or nothing to recall Paul’s stay 
in Ephesus or any of the many things that made his work among 
the Ephesians so memorable and the terms on which he and they 
stood to each other so close and affectionate. In the present case 
there is only the very general salutation which is given in the last 
two verses; and that is something less particular than the salutation 
with which the Epistle to the Philippians closes ; while there are 
none of those personal touches throughout the Epistle to relieve the 
impersonal conclusion such as we find in these other letters. And 
in addition to the argument which founds on this neutral, impersonal 
quality of the Epistle, there are expressions here and there which per- 
haps suggest relations of a different kind from those which we know to 
have existed between Paul and the Ephesians. Not to speak of such 
passages as i. 15, there is the statement in iii. 4, which seems to 
some to mean that those addressed had yet to learn what Paul’s 
“knowledge of the mystery in Christ” was; which could not be 
said of the Ephesians. There are also the two passages in which 
Paul uses the formula : “if indeed” (ili. 2, iv. 21, 22); of which it 
may be said that, although εἴγε does not necessarily express actual 
doubt, it is a particle more in place where the speaker’s own ex- 
perience or work is not in view, than where he addresses those who 
owe to him what they are and with whom his relations are direct 
and intimate. 

The result, therefore, to which many have been led since Arch- 
bishop Ussher first threw out the suggestion is that this Epistle is a 
circular letter meant for a number of Churches in a particular part 
of the Asiatic province, of which Ephesus was one. This view is 
accepted in one way or other by such authorities as Bengel, 
Neander, Harless,- Olshausen, Reuss, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Hort, 
Weiss, Woldemar Schmidt, Abbott, etc. This general conclusion, 
however, is put in more than one form. Some regard the sen- 
tence as complete in itself and as requiring nothing to be in- 
serted after the τοῖς οὖσιν. Bengel, e.g., looking to the κατὰ τὴν 
οὖσαν ἐκκλησίαν of Acts xiii. 1, and the αἱ δὲ οὖσαι ἐξουσίαι of Rom. xiii. 
1, rendered it “ sanctis et fidelibus qui sunt in omnibus iis locis, quo 
Tychicus cum hac Epistola venit”. But the introduction of ἐν 
᾿Αντιοχείᾳ in the former and the force of the οὖσιν in the latter make 
these imperfect parallels. Others give the words the sense of “the 
saints who are really such” or “the saints existing and faithful in 
Christ Jesus”. But neither of these readings can be justified. The 
only interpretation of the clause that is quite consistent with grammar, 





| 
! 





INTRODUCTION 233 


in making it a sentence complete within itself, is “the saints who are 
also faithful’. Adopting this, some (e¢.g., Abbott, following Reiche, 
Ewald, etc.) take the Epistle to be addressed not to any particular 
Church or Churches as such, but generally to all the Christian 
people in the Phrygian parts. This hypothesis, it is held, ex- 
plains the absence of local particulars; avoids the necessity of 
supposing that a blank space had been left after the τοῖς οὖσιν ; and 
enables us to understand the phrase ‘the epistle from Laodicea ” 
in Col. iv. 16. Others, however, think the case is better met by 
supposing that a space was left in which the name of the particular 
church might be inserted to which the letter was addressed in the 
course of its circular journeyings ; or, as Hort prefers to put it, that 
the blank in the original copy sent with Tychicus was filled in with 
the name of the Church of each place in which it was read. 

The last is perhaps the most natural explanation. And on 
the whole question it may be said that it is much easier to under- 
stand how the local designation should have come to be inserted 
than to imagine how, if originally in the text, it should have come 
to be omitted, and that, too, at so early a date. The fact that the 
Ephesian Church was the Church of the chief city of the Asiatic 
Province and the most important Church in all these parts would 
account for the insertion of ἐν Ἐφέσῳ, especially if, as is most 
probable, it was from Ephesus that copies were sent elsewhere. The 
fact that the Epistle was meant for a wider audience than that found 
in Ephesus itself would account for the circulation of such a letter 
as that referred to as “the epistle from Laodicea”. On the other 
hand, the supposition that the Epistle was meant originally only for 
Ephesus, and that the ἐν Ἐφέσῳ came to be dropped either by acci- 
dent or by design, is one hard to entertain. It is difficult to imagine 
how mere accident could account for the omission, and to say that 
the local designation was struck out of certain very ancient copies 
because it did not appear to be in harmony with the contents of the 
letter is to attribute to these very early times the operation of a 
criticism of which we have very little evidence. 

7. ΤΙΜῈ AND Piace or Composition. The date has been put 
variously, ¢.g., at A.D. 55-58 (McGiffert) ; 60 or 61 (Meyer) ; 62 (Zahn) ; 
61-63 (Lightfoot); 75 to 80 (Ewald) ; about a.p. 80 (Scholten); about 


a.p. 100 (Holtzmann, Mangold); 130-140 (Baur, Davidson). The 


question of the date depends largely on the question of the place. 
The Epistle itself makes it clear that Paul was a prisoner when 
he wrote it (iii. 1, iv. 1, vi. 20). It contains things, too, which 
point to some affinity between it and other Epistles in which the 


234 INTRODUCTION 


writer is a prisoner. The reference to Tychicus as the bearer con- 
nects it with the Epistles to Philemon and the Colossians (cf. vi. 
21, Phil. 13, Col. iv. 7), and suggests that these three letters belong 
very much to the same period, and that they were written when 
Paul was occupied very much with the same questions. Two 
imprisonments, however, come into view—the one in Czsarea (Acts 
xxiii, 35, xxiv. 27), the other in Rome (Acts xxviii.), Each of these 
has its supporters. 

The view that this Epistle belongs to the period of the Czsarean 
Captivity is advocated with great ability by Reuss and Meyer among 
others. Reuss contends that the theory that the various Epistles 
of the Captivity were all written from Rome rests mostly on “ un- 
authenticated tradition”; that the mood of the Apostle in the 
Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon suits his circum- 
stances in Cesarea better than those in Rome; that there are 
chronological difficulties of a serious nature in the way of referring 
these three Epistles together with Philippians and 2 Timothy to 
Rome; that this makes it necessary to divide the five between 
Czsarea and Rome; and that the various allusions to individuals, 
such as Tychicus, Timothy and Demetrius, in these Epistles are 
best harmonised, and certain particular statements, such as the 
spds ὥραν in Phil. 15, best understood, on the theory that those te 
Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon were written in Ceesarea. 

Meyer admits that some of the arguments thus used by Reuss 
cannot be pressed, especially those founding on such indications as 
the πρὸς ὥραν, and on the idea that the friends of Paul mentioned in 
Colossians (iv. 9-14) and Philemon (10, 23) could not have been with 
him at Rome. But he attaches great importance to these con- 
siderations—vis., (1) that it is more probable that Onesimus should 
have sought safety in Colossz than that he should have risked the 
long journey by sea to Rome, and the possibilities of capture in 
Rome; (2) that if Ephesians and Colossians had been sent from 
Rome, Tychicus and Onesimus would have arrived at Ephesus first 
and afterwards at Colossz; in which case it would be reasonable to 
suppose that Paul would have mentioned Onesimus to the Ephesians, 
as he does in the Epistle to the Colossians; (3) that the iva εἰδῆτε 
καὶ ὑμεῖς in Eph. vi, 21 implies that when Tychicus reached Ephesus 
he “would already have fulfilled the aim here expressed in the case 
of others,” and these others are the Colossians (Col. iv. 8, 9); and 
(4) that in Phil. 22 Paul asks a lodging to be prepared for his speedy 
use—a statement implying that his place of imprisonment was not 
so distant from Colossz as Rome was. 








INTRODUCTION 235 


These arguments, however, when narrowly examined, are not so 
convincing as they appear at first sight to be. A runaway slave would 
in reality be more likely to escape discovery in the thick masses of 
the population of the world’s metropolis than in Czsarea. Our 
ignorance of the circumstances of the flight of Onesimus and the 
supposition that the Epistle is an Encyclical make the argument 
from the lack of any such mention of Onesimus as we find in Colos- 
sians uncertain. The ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε καὶ ὑμεῖς does not necessarily imply 
what Meyer infers from it, and the same may be said of the reference 
to the lodging in Philemon. 

On the other hand there are weighty objections to referring this 
Epistle to the Czsarean imprisonment. Thus, the circumstances 
of the captivity seem to suit Rome better than Czsarea. For when 
we compare Acts xxiv. 23 with Acts xxviii. 16, etc., we gather that 
the Apostle had less liberty in Czesarea than in Rome, and this 
accords ill with such passages as Eph. vi. 19, 20. The number of 
friends mentioned in these Epistles of the Captivity as companions of 
Paul—Aristarchus, Marcus, Jesus Justus, Lucas, Demas, Epaphras, 
Tychicus, Onesimus—is considerable, so considerable as to make it 
probable, as Alford, ¢.g., contends, that he was in Rome; for it was 
there rather than in Czsarea that so many might have been with 
him. Then there is the argument drawn from the relations between 
the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians. 
If these letters belong to much the same period in Paul’s career 
(and there is much to favour that), then the mention of “ Czsar’s 
household” in Phil. iv. 22 points much more to Rome than to 
Czesarea as the place of the Apostle’s residence when he wrote 
these kindred communications; and the same holds good of the 
statement of his progress in Phil. i. 21, etc. In neither case can 
Czesarea be fairly said to suit the circumstances, or to be of the 
importance implied. The expectation also which the Apostle appears 
to entertain when he wrote Philippians was that of speedy release 
and a visit to Macedonia (i. 26, ii. 24, Phil. 22); but what he looked 
to when he was in Czsarea was rather that he might go to Rome. 

These arguments will become all the stronger if it is made out 
that Philippians was written before Ephesians. There is the greater 
reason then for taking the latter to have been written at Rome. 
This is a question which need not be discussed at length here. 
It is enough to say that the arguments against the priority of 
Philippians in the line of these four letters of the Captivity are 
neither very certain nor very weighty, while there are various 
internal considerations which favour the priority. Of these the 


236 INTRODUCTION 


most important perhaps is found in the points of contact on the 
one hand between Philippians and the earlier Pauline Epistles, 
especially Romans, and on the other hand between Philippians 
and the other three Epistles of the Captivity. These have been 
worked out with care by Lightfoot among others, at once with 
regard to particular expressions and to parallels in thought. They 
have led him and others to the conclusion that the Epistle to the 
Philippians is the middle link between the great letter to the Romans 
and those to the Ephesians, the Colossians, and Philemon. The 
majority of scholars, therefore, take our Epistle to have been written 
at Rome. If so, its date may be about a.p. 62 or 63. 

The question has also been considerably discussed whether our 
Epistle is prior to that to the Colossians or posterior to it. That 
it is prior is argued from its more general aim; from the more 
abstract character of its contents; and from the consideration that, 
as it is an Epistle which would be much more difficult to draw up 
than that to the Colossians, the resemblances between the two are 
best accounted for by supposing that some of the ideas thought 
out in the former were transferred to the latter. On the other 
hand, it is held that, as Colosse was nearer Czsarea and would be 
reached by Tychicus before he got to Ephesus, it is more natural to 
think that the Epistle to that Church would be written before the 
other, as it would be delivered before it. But this presupposes that 
the place of composition was Czsarea. And the same is the case with 
the contention that the καὶ ὑμεῖς of Eph. vi. 21 refers to the Colossians 
(cf. Col. iv. 7), and presupposes that Paul had already communicated 
with Colosse. These are all very precarious arguments, and the 
question must be regarded as undecided. 

8. Tue Docrtring oF THE EpisTLE. The teaching of the Epistle 
is at once so lofty and so profound as to more than justify all that has 
been said of the grandeur of the composition by discerning minds in 
ancient and in modern times. Chrysostom speaks of the Epistle as 
“ overflowing with lofty thoughts and doctrines””—one in which 
Paul expounds things “ which he scarcely anywhere else utters ”. 
(ὑψηλῶν σφόδρα γέμει τῶν νοημάτων Kal ὑπερόγκων - ἃ γὰρ μηδαμοῦ σχέδον 
ἐφθέγξατο, ταῦτα ἐνταῦθα δηλοῖ) Theophylact, Grotius, Witsius and 
others speak of it in similar terms. Adolphe Monod, in his Explica- 
tion, describes it as “embracing in its brevity the whole field of the 
Christian religion,” as expounding “ now its doctrines, now its morals 
with such conciseness and such fulness combined that it would be 
difficult to name any great doctrine or any essential duty which has 
not its place marked in it”. And Coleridge wrote of it as ‘ one of 





a a i i le aie 





a 


ss  ς ae aie al ert “Ze pes 
) Sts et SS 


INTRODUCTION 237 


the divinest compositions of man,” embracing “every doctrine of 
Christianity—first those doctrines peculiar to Christianity, and then 
those precepts common to it with natural religion” (Table Talk). 

What gives it its peculiar majesty is the way in which it carries 
everything back to God Himself, His will, His eternal purpose and 
counsel. It is a distinctively theological Epistle, in the sense in which 
the Epistle to the Romans is distinctively anthropological or psycho- 
logical, and that to the Colossians Christological. The great subjects 
of predestination and the Divine plan, eternal in the mind of God, 
centring in Christ and fulfilled in Him, have a larger and more 
definite place in this Epistle than in any other, excepting Rom. viii.- 
xi. It has at the same time, however, a rich Christology. Christ is 
set forth as the Son of God (i. 3, iv. 13) ; the Beloved of the Father 
(i. 6); pre-existent (i. 4); raised from the dead and exalted to supreme 
sovereignty over all things—King of the universe and Head of the 
Church (i. 20-23, ii. 6, iv. 9, 12, v. 23); the Giver of all spiritual 
gifts (iv. 7, 8); the Treasury of all knowledge and riches (iii. 8-10) ; 
having the place given in the OT to Jehovah (iv. 8). 

Its Soteriology also is of wide compass. It speaks of Christ as 
the medium of God’s forgiveness of sinners (iv. 32); of redemption 
as coming to us by Him (i, 7); of the offering and the sacrifice made to 
God in Christ’s giving of Himself (v. 2); of the reconciliation of Jew 
and Gentile as accomplished by Him; of the gracious results of His 
work as being effected by His blood and His cross (i. 7, ii. 16). The 
doctrine of the Church also reaches its highest point in this Epistle. 
Not only is the Church the Bride of Christ (v. 25-27) and His Body 
and the fulness of His gifts, but it is the Church ideal—one great, 
catholic, spiritual body including all the chosen, redeemed and 
sanctified. And among other doctrines which have a place in it is 
that of the Holy Spirit as active in the prophets (iii. 5), and as the 
believer’s seal and earnest (i. 13, 14, iv. 30) ; that of regeneration as 
the operation of God (ii. 25); and that of the existence and power 
of evil spirits (ii. 2, vi. 12). The deep foundations of the confessional 
doctrine of original sin are also found by many in ii. 3, and the great 
Reformation doctrine of the priority of grace has its roots in ii. 5-8, 

9. Tue LITERATURE OF THE EpistLE. The literature is copious. 
Not to mention the well-known books on New Testament Introduction, 
the various works on the Biblical Theology of the New Testament, 
and the articles in the great Bible Dictionaries and Encyclopedias, 
there are many treatises of importance in addition to the formal 
commentaries, Among these may be mentioned C. FP. Baur’s 
Paulus der Apostel $esu Christi ; H. J. Holtzmann’s Kritik der 


238 INTRODUCTION 


Epheser- und Kolosser-briefe; J. Késtlin’s Der Lehrbegriff des Evang. 
und der verwandten N. T. Lehrbegriffe ; A. Liinemann’s De Epistola 
ad Ephesios Authentia; J. FP. Raebiger’s De Christologia Paulina 
contra Baurium Commentatio; C. von Weizsacker’s A post. Zettalter ; 
L. Usteri’s Entwicklung des Paul. Lehrbegriff's ; O. Pfleiderer’s Der 


Paulinismus (Paulinism, tr. by B. Peters) and his Urchristentum ; 


A. Sabatier’s L’A pétre Paul (The Apostle Paul, tr. by A. M. Hellier) ; 
J.T. Wood’s Modern Discoveries on the Site of Ancient Ephesus ; 
A. C. M’Giffert’s History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age; 
G. 6. Findlay’s Ephesians (The Expositor’s Bible); R. S. Candlish’s 
Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians, expounded in a series of Discourses ; 
J. Pulsford’s Christ and His Seed, central to all things, being a series 
of Expository Discourses on Ephesians; R: W. Dale’s The Epistle 
to the Ephesians, tts Doctrine and Ethics; J. B. Lightfoot’s Biblical 
Essays ; P. J. A. Hort’s Prolegomena to St. Paul’s Epistles to the 
Romans and the Ephesians ; W. Μ΄. Ramsay’s Cities and Bishoprics 
of Phrygia, Historical Geography of Asia Minor, Church in the 
Roman Empire, and St. Paul the Traveller. 

Among commentaries the following may be noticed: those by 
Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, Theophylact, Jer- 
ome and CEcumenius in ancient times; those by Luther, Bugenhagen, 
Bucer and Calvin in the Reformation period—of which Calvin’s is by 
far the best; P. Bayne’s Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians 
(1643); J. Rerguson’s A Brief Exposition of the Epistles of Paul to 
the Galatians and Ephesians (1659) ; Thomas Goodwin’s Exposition 
(1681); L. Ridley’s Commentary (1546); R. Rollock’s In Ep. Pauli 
ad Ephesios Commentarius (1580); also H. Zanchius, Comment. in 
Ep. ad Ephesios (1594) ; R. Boyd of Trochrig, In Epistolam Pauli 
Apost. ad Ephesios Praelectiones (1652); John Locke, Paraphrase 
and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians, Corinthians, 
Romans, Ephesians (1707); δ. D. Michaelis, Paraphrase τ. Anmer- 
kungen iiber die Briefe Pauli an die Galat., Eph., Phil., Col. 
(1750, 1769); S. F. N. Morus, Acroases in Epp. Paulinas ad Galatas 
et Ephesios (1795); P. J. Spener, Erkldrung der Episteln an die 
Epheser und Colosser (1706); G. T. Zachariz, Paraphrastische Erk- 
larung der Briefe Pauli an die Gal., Eph., Philip., «. Thess. (1771, 
1787). 

Of works of more recent date those by the following may be men- 
tioned: Dr, Alfred Barry, in Ellicott’s New Testament Commentary for 
English Readers ; L. P.O. Baumgarten Crusius, Comm. iber die Briefe 
Pauli an die Eph. u. Kol, (1847); J. A. Beet, Commentary on the 
Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians and Philemon; 4. 


5 | 
ἱ 
,} 
ΠῚ 
᾿ 

: 

ΐ 

: 

t 

i 








- . 


INTRODUCTION 239 


T. Beck, Erklarung des Briefes Pauli an die Epheser; FP, Bleek, 
Vorlesungen δεν die Briefe an die Kol., d. Philemon, u. d. Epheser ; 
K. Braune, in Lange’s Bibelwerk ; J. G. Candlish, The Epistle 
of Paul to the Ephesians; J. L. Davies, The Epistles to the 
Ephesians, Colossians and Philemon; John Eadie, Commentary on 
the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians ; C. J. Elli- 
cott, Critical and Grammatical Commentary on Ephesians, with a 
Revised Translation; G. H. A. Ewald, Die Sendschreiben des Ap. 
Paulus iibers, u. erklart, and Steben
Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The expositor's Greek Testament"

See other formats
